Paul Eggert wrote:
> For the -Wnull-dereference issue it may be worthwhile to use a
> circumlocution that fools GCC into not issuing the warning. After all, a
> compiler smart enough to warn about '*(volatile int *) 0 = 42' might
> also be smart enough to see that it's undefined behavior and the
Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> One little aspect of the tests code is that people might look (also) there to
> learn how to use a certain gnulib module, and then copy/paste the code from
> there into their projects.
Yes, a secondary value of the unit tests is to show how the APIs can be
correctly used.
On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 09:42:55AM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> For what it's worth I'm more with Bruno on this. For the tests, the cost
> of these warnings outweighs the benefit.
>
> It'd be OK with me to disable the troublesome warnings globally for the
> tests subdirectory, using -Wno-missing-
On 6/8/21 12:57 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> The difference between lib/ and tests/ is that code in lib/ goes into
> the binaries delivered by the packages, and therefore if a package
> maintainer makes an effort to silence a warning, we will consider
> their patch. Whereas for tests, as I said, it is
