On 02/15/2007 08:02 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Think of it this way: in science, a theory is proven to be bad by a
single undeniable fact just showing that it's wrong.
The same is largely true of a warning. If the warning sometimes
happens for code that is perfectly fine, the warning is bad.
Slight difference; if a compulsory warning sometimes happens for code
that is perfectly fine, the warning is bad. I do want to be _able_ to
get as many warnings as a compiler can muster though.
Given char's special nature, shouldn't the conclusion of this thread
have long been simply that gcc needs -Wno-char-pointer-sign? (with
whatever default, as far as I'm concerned).
Rene.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/