On 01/04/2012 02:35 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 04.01.2012 20:44, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Robert Haas<robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Peter
Geoghegan<pe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Yes, I know that these only appeared in GCC 4.6+ and as such are a
relatively recent phenomenon, but there has been some effort to
eliminate them, and if I could get a non-hacked -Werror build I'd
feel
happy enough about excluding them as already outlined.
I just do this:
echo COPT=-Werror> src/Makefile.custom
...which seems to work reasonably well.
I see no point in -Werror whatsoever. If you aren't examining the make
output for warnings, you're not following proper development practice
IMO.
I find -Werror to be a convenient way to examine the output for
warnings. Otherwise they scroll off the screen. Yeah, I could save
the output to a file and grep it afterwards, but that seems less
convenient. I'm clearly not the only one doing it this way, since
src/backend/parser/gram.o manually sticks in -Wno-error...
I use "make -s".
Yeah, that's a good thing to do.
We are by far the most vigilant project I am aware of about fixing
warnings. That's a Good Thing (tm,). Build most FOSS software and you
see huge numbers of warnings fly by. It can get quite distressing.
We turn the errors off for gram.o precisely because we can't control it,
since the included source file scan.c is generated by flex.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
