Am Freitag, 11. August 2006 22:50 schrieb Patrice Dumas: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:50:28PM +0200, Markus Raab wrote: > > Am Dienstag, 1. August 2006 01:27 schrieb Patrice Dumas:
> For me -ansi add more warnings, since it complains for functions that > are not in C99 but are in previous standards. -pedantic don't change > anything. "The -ansi option does not cause non-ISO programs to be rejected gratuitously. For that, -pedantic is required in addition to -ansi." And for me reaching ISO C99 Code is an aim (but not the most important...) > Most warnings triggered by -Wall are fixed now in CVS. -Wall has another aim then -ansi -pedantic. > > That was the reason why I added it there where it compiles with that > > options. > > That's very strange. Is it still the case? The cvs version now adds > -Wall if compiler is gcc and CFLAGS is empty. But I removed -pedantic, > -ansi (and -Wall) everywhere in the Makefile.am. Which will move us away from the aim to have C99 code once in the future;) > > elektra does not work with anything then gcc for now;) > > Is it sure? mmh, where I tested it, it failed because of -ansi -pedantic fails. There are some gcc features used... > porting to another platform leads frequently to issues, while changing > the compiler isn't an issue most of the time. If you use C99. If you use all gcc features you may have luck with the intel compiler, but others? > > If you can convice me, I will remove it (and not add it anywhere again). > > But gcc is the only working and does -Werror and-Wall break it? > > Indeed, since there are still warnings remaining with -Wall. mmh, make install failes here too;) test -e libelektra-ddefault.so || \ ln -s libelektra-berkeleydb.so libelektra-ddefault.so ln: ,,libelektra-ddefault.so": file existing > > Can you show me another solution to add -ansi -pedantic for only parts of > > elektra? > > There is no other solution. Currently I have removed those options, but > I can readd those if you need to. Of course I would like it more to have it everywhere. But there are so many parts and some tricky features so I decided to have some parts C99 first. > However I fail to see why they should be needed. Because the C gcc accepts (without that flags) is something else then C99. And something else then any other compiler supports (see linux source, but even they restrict to some features). thank you Markus Raab ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Registry-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/registry-list
