On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:21:26PM +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > Am Dienstag, 9. August 2011, 12:07:12 schrieb Phil Holmes: > > at them. There are nine warnings from the code compiler: > > And that number is really amazing and absolutely proves my point: Coders PAY > attention to warnings and usually fix them in the code they write. > I would have expected way more compiler warnings in the C++ code!
We probably don't have all the gcc warning options enabled. Hint: using -Wall does *not* get you all warnings! (sometimes I hate gcc) > so, you really expect us developers to do the following when compiling: > > 1) change some code > 2) run make > 3) WAIT until the build is finished (which takes a LONG time) > 4) find the logfile > 5) open the logfile > 6) search the part of the logfile that is about the code you changed > 7) Check the warnings > 8) fix them -> start at 1) No, of course not. I was thinking of: 1. change some code 2. make 3. make show-warnings But more than that, I expect (or at least, hope) that everybody will take a chill pill and stop talking about the build system. We are **not** going to be discussing the code-building part of make for another month or so. After I've sent my income tax review material (apparently the Canada Revenue Agency isn't happy with an online-only submission which involves $20,000+ in tuition fees from a foreign university!), I will prepare a proposal for the behaviour of "make doc". To clarify: we will **only** be discussing "make doc". Not "make bin". Not "make clean". Not "make". Talking about anything else is a complete waste of time, because we will start over from the very beginning in a month. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel