Re: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 08:54 +0200, Cor Nouws wrote: > > That was also feed back from the audience, during the IBM > Presentation > at OOoCon. > The IBM people took good notice of it. Seemed like they are gooing to > change it. Because the community can't. Hint. Hint. Hub ---

Re: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

Hubert Figuiere schreef: On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 11:56 -0400, Allen Pulsifer wrote: To all the OpenOffice users who might be interesting in trying out IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta): DO NOT INSTALL IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta) !!! That was also feed back from the audience, during the IBM Presentat

Re: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 11:56 -0400, Allen Pulsifer wrote: > To all the OpenOffice users who might be interesting in trying out IBM > Lotus > Symphony (Beta): > >DO NOT INSTALL IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta) !!! Here the TnstallShield crash and let a process running with a high CPU load from /tmp

RE: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

> Even OOo won't restore the file associations to the older program... > the easier way to fix it is to repair the OOo setup or reinstall. Yes, I tried that. OOo very politely respected the Symphony file associations and did no repair. The only way I got it to work was to delete all traces of Sy

Re: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

Allen Pulsifer, 28-09-2007 13:49: Its in the Symphony Program folder on your hard drive where the program is located at. I also looked for a Symphony folder under the Start menu (in case it had an uninstaller) but Symphony does not install its Start items into a folder. So I assume you mean I

Re: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

go into the _uninst folder and launch uninstaller.bin On Sep 28, 2007, at 9:49 AM, Allen Pulsifer wrote: Its in the Symphony Program folder on your hard drive where the program is located at. I also looked for a Symphony folder under the Start menu (in case it had an uninstaller) but Sympho

RE: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

> Its in the Symphony Program folder on your hard drive where the > program is located at. I also looked for a Symphony folder under the Start menu (in case it had an uninstaller) but Symphony does not install its Start items into a folder. So I assume you mean I should have looked in C:\Pr

Re: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

Its in the Symphony Program folder on your hard drive where the program is located at. On Sep 28, 2007, at 9:34 AM, Allen Pulsifer wrote: Well I tried it out on Windows too and I could install and de-install it, using the "Software" option in the System folder. However, some associations (I t

RE: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

> Well I tried it out on Windows too and I could install and > de-install it, using the "Software" option in the System > folder. However, some associations (I think ODT or ODS) did > not get restored correctly. Hello Rony, Kindly forgive my confusion. What is the "software option in the syst

Re: [dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

Allen Pulsifer wrote: > To all the OpenOffice users who might be interesting in trying out IBM Lotus > Symphony (Beta): > >DO NOT INSTALL IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta) !!! > > I tried it out. It took over all of my OpenDoc file associations, without > warning, and installed itself into a handful

[dev] WARNING: Do Not Install IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta)

To all the OpenOffice users who might be interesting in trying out IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta): DO NOT INSTALL IBM Lotus Symphony (Beta) !!! I tried it out. It took over all of my OpenDoc file associations, without warning, and installed itself into a handful of other file associations. IT HAS

Re: [dev] Warning about hidden function

Hi Daniel, Bjoern Milcke schrieb: Hi, on Solaris I get a warning in this situation: class A { private: foo( int ); }; class B : public A { private: foo(); // <- warning: hidden A::foo( int ) }; This appears strange to me, how can I hide a private function of the base class, it should

Re: [dev] Warning about hidden function

Bjoern Milcke schrieb: Hi, on Solaris I get a warning in this situation: class A { private: foo( int ); }; class B : public A { private: foo(); // <- warning: hidden A::foo( int ) }; This appears strange to me, how can I hide a private function of the base class, it should be hidden any

Re: [dev] Warning about hidden function

Bjoern Milcke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This appears strange to me, how can I hide a private function of the > base class, it should be hidden anyway. Is this a false alarm of the > compiler, or did I miss something? > Hi Bjoern, visibility and accessibility are different kind of beasts. One

[dev] Warning about hidden function

Hi, on Solaris I get a warning in this situation: class A { private: foo( int ); }; class B : public A { private: foo(); // <- warning: hidden A::foo( int ) }; This appears strange to me, how can I hide a private function of the base class, it should be hidden anyway. Is this a false ala

Re: [dev] Warning: operator += enforces hidden conversion

Bjoern Milcke wrote: Hi Stephan, Bjoern Milcke wrote: Hi Stephan, I came across the following piece of code: String a; xub_StrLen n = 0; n += a.Len(); This breaks on Windows (due to -werror). Because of the warning: warning C4244: '+=' : conversion from 'int' to 'USHORT', poss

Re: [dev] Warning: operator += enforces hidden conversion

Hi Stephan, Bjoern Milcke wrote: Hi Stephan, I came across the following piece of code: String a; xub_StrLen n = 0; n += a.Len(); This breaks on Windows (due to -werror). Because of the warning: warning C4244: '+=' : conversion from 'int' to 'USHORT', possible loss of data (in

Re: [dev] Warning: operator += enforces hidden conversion

Hi Bjoern, Bjoern Milcke schrieb: I came across the following piece of code: String a; xub_StrLen n = 0; n += a.Len(); This breaks on Windows (due to -werror). Because of the warning: warning C4244: '+=' : conversion from 'int' to 'USHORT', possible loss of data (in the last lin

Re: [dev] Warning: operator += enforces hidden conversion

Bjoern Milcke wrote: Hi Stephan, I came across the following piece of code: String a; xub_StrLen n = 0; n += a.Len(); This breaks on Windows (due to -werror). Because of the warning: warning C4244: '+=' : conversion from 'int' to 'USHORT', possible loss of data (in the last line

Re: [dev] Warning: operator += enforces hidden conversion

Hi Stephan, I came across the following piece of code: String a; xub_StrLen n = 0; n += a.Len(); This breaks on Windows (due to -werror). Because of the warning: warning C4244: '+=' : conversion from 'int' to 'USHORT', possible loss of data (in the last line of the fragment) [

Re: [dev] Warning: operator += enforces hidden conversion

Bjoern Milcke wrote: Hi, I am a bit late with warning-freeness, I just now resynced against a master build that contains warnings01 and pals. Maybe this problem here is not new, but I didn't find anything about this. I came across the following piece of code: String a; xub_StrLen n

Re: [dev] Warning: operator += enforces hidden conversion

Hi all, I came across the following piece of code: String a; xub_StrLen n = 0; n += a.Len(); This breaks on Windows (due to -werror). Because of the warning: warning C4244: '+=' : conversion from 'int' to 'USHORT', possible loss of data (in the last line of the fragment) [...

[dev] Warning: operator += enforces hidden conversion

Hi, I am a bit late with warning-freeness, I just now resynced against a master build that contains warnings01 and pals. Maybe this problem here is not new, but I didn't find anything about this. I came across the following piece of code: String a; xub_StrLen n = 0; n += a.Len();

[dev] Warning-free code CWS naming convention request

Hi folks, if possible please name your CWS which are related to to the warning-free code project in a recognizable manner, e.g "Warnings0x". This helps me - and others in the QA - to do a quicker estimate on the effort required to check the CWS and simplifies planning. Thanks Joerg -- **

[dev] Warning-free code status

Hi all, tracks the status of that project. If you own one of the tasks listed there, or are working to make some other platform warning-free, you are invited to add any relevant data and help keep the table up to date. Than

[dev] Is override via dominance useful (was: [dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled)

Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > (What I intended to say was: what I've learned during reading zillions > of line of code inherited from others is that patterns which are > obscured from plain sight are hard to maintain, and thus prone to > introducing error

Re: [dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled

Hi Thorsten, > What I intended to say was, that this feature is not obvious, seldomly > used, and therefore 'obscured' from plain sight - do I make sense now? Yeah, probably. (What I intended to say was: what I've learned during reading zillions of line of code inherited from others is that patt

Re: [dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled

Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I consider this behaviour a useful (if obscure) feature of c++ > > "useful and obscure" ... I'm tempted to call this an oxymoron :) > Depending on your local definition of obscure, of course. ;-) What I intended to say w

Re: [dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled

Hi Thorsten, off-topic, but ... > I consider this behaviour a useful (if obscure) feature of c++ "useful and obscure" ... I'm tempted to call this an oxymoron :) Ciao Frank -- - Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - Sun Microsystems http://www.s

Re: [dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled

Thorsten Behrens wrote: Hi *, some more on this - MSVC's C4250 warning, telling us that "'class1' : inherits 'class2::member' via dominance", prohibits the following pattern: struct Interface { virtual void a() = 0; virtual void b() = 0; }; struct DerivedInterface : public Interface { virtu

Re: [dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled

Hi *, some more on this - MSVC's C4250 warning, telling us that "'class1' : inherits 'class2::member' via dominance", prohibits the following pattern: struct Interface { virtual void a() = 0; virtual void b() = 0; }; struct DerivedInterface : public Interface { virtual void c() = 0; }; struc

Re: [dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled

Thorsten Behrens wrote: Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Thorsten Behrens wrote: [...] C4668 can potentially unearth real portability problems (that a try to access an undefined preprocessor macro evaluates to '0' is a convention possibly not shared by all c++ compilers of this un

Re: [dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled

Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thorsten Behrens wrote: > > - > > Compiler Warning (level 3) C4686 'user-defined type' : possible > > change in behavior, change in UDT > > return calling convention > [...] > > Agre

Re: [dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled

Thorsten Behrens wrote: Hi folks, while trying to get basebmp and vigra warning free, I've been bitten by the following two msvc warnings: - Compiler Warning (level 3) C4686 'user-defined type' : possible change in behavior

[dev] Warning free code: some more warnings that might be disabled

Hi folks, while trying to get basebmp and vigra warning free, I've been bitten by the following two msvc warnings: - Compiler Warning (level 3) C4686 'user-defined type' : possible change in behavior, change in UDT return call

Re: [dev] Warning free code and GCC pragma system_header for external 3rd party headers

Le Vendredi 4 Août 2006 13:18, Eike Rathke a écrit : > Hi, > > Since for 3rd party headers that are not to be patched an accepted > solution is to enclose the include statement in some warnings guard, the > GCC pragma system_header approach needs some extra caution, just added > the following to th

[dev] Warning free code and GCC pragma system_header for external 3rd party headers

Hi, Since for 3rd party headers that are not to be patched an accepted solution is to enclose the include statement in some warnings guard, the GCC pragma system_header approach needs some extra caution, just added the following to the wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Writing_warning-

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Nikolai Pretzell schrieb: The choice of operator is indeed unfortunate. However, I do not agree that - T b; + T b = T(); is in general a fix that improves code quality. I beg to disagree. It is always possible that between declaration and first use of b other code is added later.

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

The choice of operator is indeed unfortunate. However, I do not agree that - T b; + T b = T(); is in general a fix that improves code quality. I beg to disagree. It is always possible that between declaration and first use of b other code is added later. If then b has at least a defin

[dev] Bad operator overloading, was: Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

> > void f(com::sun::star::uno::Any const & a) { > sal_Bool b; > if (a >>= b) { > // warning if b is used here > } > } Ok, I'm not a C++ programmer and this is probably not the right place to start learning. But isn't it the left (a) side that gets assigned in a >>= b?

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi Stephan, > forgive me if I missed this in >>the thread: About which order of magnitued do we talk here? 10 places? >>1? > > 10^2--10^3 would be my guess Hmm, that's quite a lot ... Ciao Frank -- - Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - Sun Microsystems

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany wrote: Hi Stephan, In the case of sal_Bool, it might be true that false is a better default value than true (no pun intended), but that need not be the case always, so you would have to analyze each place in the code where you add "= false", which is

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi Stephan, > In the case of sal_Bool, it might be true that false is a better default > value than true (no pun intended), but that need not be the case always, > so you would have to analyze each place in the code where you add "= > false", which is tedious due to the large number of places i

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany wrote: Hi Stephan, So, it seems that we have used the wrong operator here. Therefor I tend to agree to Frank, that we may want to fix this. The choice of operator is indeed unfortunate. However, I do not agree that - T b; + T b = T(); is in g

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote: Stephan Bergmann wrote: Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote: Hi, please correct me, if I am wrong. I understand this as a 'C' inherited C++ oddity (no constructors for integral values), which leads to a warning if the first operation on the integr

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi Stephan, >>So, it seems that we have used the wrong operator here. Therefor I tend >>to agree to Frank, that we may want to fix this. > > The choice of operator is indeed unfortunate. However, I do not agree that > >- T b; >+ T b = T(); > > is in general a fix that improves code qu

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Stephan Bergmann wrote: Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote: Hi, please correct me, if I am wrong. I understand this as a 'C' inherited C++ oddity (no constructors for integral values), which leads to a warning if the first operation on the integral value is not classified as "assignment

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Stephan Bergmann wrote: [...] C2 (M2, M3, M4): Create one CWS for the 20 wntmsci10 modules, svx, and desktop. Testing will be somewhat expensive. We should start this early and see we can integrate early in 2.0.5 timeframe. This could be distributed between three persons, one each for M2--M

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote: Hi, please correct me, if I am wrong. I understand this as a 'C' inherited C++ oddity (no constructors for integral values), which leads to a warning if the first operation on the integral value is not classified as "assignment". Obviously 'operator >>

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi, please correct me, if I am wrong. I understand this as a 'C' inherited C++ oddity (no constructors for integral values), which leads to a warning if the first operation on the integral value is not classified as "assignment". Obviously 'operator >>=' has not been classified as "assignment

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi Henrik, >>>if (a >>= b) { > ... > But isn't it the left (a) side that gets assigned in a >>= b? > I.e. b is still not assigned and the warning is good and fixing it is > no mutilation? No. >>= here is an overloaded operator which by definition returns sal_True if and only if b could success

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Henrik Sundberg wrote: 2006/7/18, Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > As you wrote in comment 3 to issue 66577 that gcc 4.0 generates warnings > or stuff like this > > void f(com::sun::star::uno::Any const & a) { > sal_Bool b; > if (a >>= b) { > // warning if b is used here

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

2006/7/18, Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > As you wrote in comment 3 to issue 66577 that gcc 4.0 generates warnings > or stuff like this > > void f(com::sun::star::uno::Any const & a) { > sal_Bool b; > if (a >>= b) { > // warning if b is used here > } > } > > > To me

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Christian Lohmaier wrote: Hi *, On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 10:00:57AM +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: Christian Lohmaier wrote: On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: Now that CWS warnings01 is integrated and most of the OOo modules are C/C++ warning free for the standa

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi *, On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 10:00:57AM +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > Christian Lohmaier wrote: > >On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > >>Now that CWS warnings01 is integrated and most of the OOo modules are > >>C/C++ warning free for the standard platforms (unx

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Bjoern Milcke wrote: Hi Stephan, I can add EXTERNAL_WARNINGS_NOT_ERRORS=TRUE to every makefile.mk in sch on CWS sb58 to effectively exempt it from warning-freedom, just as I did for binfilter. Yes, please. testhxx only found (very few) problems in memchrt.hxx, and only on wntmsci10[.pro],

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi Stephan, I can add EXTERNAL_WARNINGS_NOT_ERRORS=TRUE to every makefile.mk in sch on CWS sb58 to effectively exempt it from warning-freedom, just as I did for binfilter. Yes, please. testhxx only found (very few) problems in memchrt.hxx, and only on wntmsci10[.pro], so getting those heade

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Bjoern Milcke wrote: Hi Stephan, M8 sch. Depending on svx. Do we want to make it warning clean, or do we want to wait for chart2? IMO making sch warning free is a complete waste of time, as it will be replaced. All time we invest there is missing for developing chart2. I can add EXTERNA

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi Stephan, M8 sch. Depending on svx. Do we want to make it warning clean, or do we want to wait for chart2? IMO making sch warning free is a complete waste of time, as it will be replaced. All time we invest there is missing for developing chart2. As you also mentioned the delivered hea

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Stephan Bergmann wrote: [...] M7 basctl, chart2, extensions, filter, lingu, xmlsecurity, starmath, sc, sd, slideshow, sw, writerperfect. All depending on svx; additionally, sd is depending on slideshow and the canvas stuff above, and sw is depending on writerperfect. What I forgot to mentio

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Christian Lohmaier wrote: On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: Now that CWS warnings01 is integrated and most of the OOo modules are C/C++ warning free for the standard platforms (unxlngi6, unxsoli4, unxsols4, wntmsci10), only for specific compiler versions. gcc 4

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi Stephan, > Opinions, anyone? sounds good, except that I would not give complete M2, M3, M4 to one person each. Those are huge tasks, and touch code where you sometimes better know what you're doing, so I suggest to do like before: Let everybody fix his/her own code here. Ciao Frank -- - Fra

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > > Now that CWS warnings01 is integrated and most of the OOo modules are > C/C++ warning free for the standard platforms (unxlngi6, unxsoli4, > unxsols4, wntmsci10), only for specific compiler versions. gcc 4.0.[23] at least can

Re: [dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > C4 (M6): Create one CWS for canvas, cppcanvas, dxcanvas, > glcanvas. This depends on C2, and the sd CWS will depend on it (i.e., > should be started in 2.0.5). > Fine with me. Cheers, -- Thorsten If you're not failing some of the time, you're no

[dev] Warning free code: the missing modules

Hi again, Now that CWS warnings01 is integrated and most of the OOo modules are C/C++ warning free for the standard platforms (unxlngi6, unxsoli4, unxsols4, wntmsci10), it is time to address the remaining modules on those standard platforms. I think we (re-?)learned two lessons from CWS warn

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

is a wiki page for all issues related to the Warning-Free Code effort. -Stephan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: [dev] Re: sal_IntPtr (was Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code)

Hi Herbert, On Fri, 16 Sep 2005, Herbert Duerr wrote: Now I would like to create one more CWS with fixes from ooo64bit02. It will fix occurances of long *pDXArray, which should be sal_Int32 *pDXArray (according to the declaration in VCL). Would you please volunteer to help with review of this

Re: [dev] Re: sal_IntPtr (was Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code)

Hi Jan, > Now I would like to create one more CWS with fixes from ooo64bit02. It > will fix occurances of long *pDXArray, which should be sal_Int32 *pDXArray > (according to the declaration in VCL). Would you please volunteer to help > with review of this one as well? ;-) I volunteer to review

Re: [dev] Re: sal_IntPtr (was Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code)

Hi, Jan Holesovsky wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Stephan Bergmann wrote: [...] Jörg Sievers (jsi) agreed to do QA on that CWS, and I would volunteer to do a code review. Thank you for that! All the patches are in the 'intptr' CWS now, so I've marked it as 'Ready for QA'. I hope it's OK;

Re: [dev] Re: sal_IntPtr (was Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code)

Stephan Bergmann wrote: Jan Holesovsky wrote: Hi, On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Stephan Bergmann wrote: The team members should also have a look at the 64-bit CWS (ooo64bit02) to see what data sizes they already changed. [...] - Added SAL_INT_CAST (for C) and std::static_int_cast and std::reint

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Christian Junker wrote: Another reason not mentioned is that few compilers complain a lot about such compact constructs as assignments in if statements, which leads to another reason why warning-free code is much better (I didn't see this in the introduction post by Stepahn): What gives warnings

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Stephan Bergmann wrote: [...] - Added SAL_INT_CAST (for C) and std::static_int_cast and std::reinterpret_int_cast (for C++) to sal/types.h and brought in sal_IntPtr and sal_uIntPtr to sal/types.h from CWS ooo64bit02. See the documentation in sal/types.h for when this new functionality should b

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 09:58 +0200, Nikolai Pretzell wrote: > Hi all, > > > Ken Foskey wrote: > >> So I would actually recommend against an all out warnings push unless > >> everyone is VERY clear the objective is to highlight bugs not to remove > >> warnings. The difference in objectives is very

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Another reason not mentioned is that few compilers complain a lot about such compact constructs as assignments in if statements, which leads to another reason why warning-free code is much better (I didn't see this in the introduction post by Stepahn): What gives warnings on one Operating System, m

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Hi all, * Initially I would suggest -Wno-reorder (I think) There are a HUGE number of errors caused simply by the order of the variables in the class declaration and I have only found one instance where it indicated a real error (parent initialisation depended on child data). The needle for t

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Hi, Ken Foskey wrote: I am also concerned that then process will become a template fix. if( fp = fopen( "file", "r" )) { can become: if( (fp = fopen( "file", "r")) ) { If I assign someone to clean up the error, say a junior programmer because it is menial, and we have this code: if( x = 4

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Hi all, > Ken Foskey wrote: So I would actually recommend against an all out warnings push unless everyone is VERY clear the objective is to highlight bugs not to remove warnings. The difference in objectives is very important. Yes, but given the mass of code we have, the only way I see to re

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

NAKATA Maho wrote: In Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 3 WE NEED YOU! Here at Hamburg, we will only concentrate on those platforms we build ourselves. Also, due to the fact that our build environment is slightly different from a typical OOo buil

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

In Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 3 WE NEED YOU! > > Here at Hamburg, we will only concentrate on those platforms we build > ourselves. Also, due to the fact that our build environment is slightly > different from a typical OOo build environment

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Ken Foskey wrote: On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:59 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: Warning free code is a basic precondition for robust industrial quality code. This as well is current scientific knowledge as the result of the personal experience of Hamburg-internal engineers, as well as the opini

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 18:50 +0200, Mathias Bauer wrote: > Ken Foskey wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:59 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > > > >> If someone think it's reasonable to suppress a warning, this must be > >> discussed with the team members. It should also be discussed in public, >

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Ken Foskey wrote: > On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:59 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > >> If someone think it's reasonable to suppress a warning, this must be >> discussed with the team members. It should also be discussed in public, >> using the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please start the subject

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:59 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > Warning free code is a basic precondition for robust industrial quality > code. This as well is current scientific knowledge as the result of the > personal experience of Hamburg-internal engineers, as well as the > opinion of some Op

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Pavel Janík wrote: From: Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 17:59:29 +0200 > free. We plan to do this massive (in number of files affected) change > for post--OOo-2.0. I forgot to ask in first e-mail. Post-2.0. You think of 2.1 or 3.0? Or? We currently

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Ken Foskey wrote: On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:59 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: If someone think it's reasonable to suppress a warning, this must be discussed with the team members. It should also be discussed in public, using the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please start the subject with “co

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:59 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > If someone think it's reasonable to suppress a warning, this must be > discussed with the team members. It should also be discussed in public, > using the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please start the subject with > “compiler warnin

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Hi michael, michael meeks wrote: On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 22:49 +0200, Pavel Janík wrote: great. Can you do all of your work on 64bit operating systems? ;-) > The team members should also have a look at the 64-bit CWS > (ooo64bit02) to see what data sizes they already changed. In

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 22:49 +0200, Pavel Janík wrote: > great. Can you do all of your work on 64bit operating systems? ;-) > >> The team members should also have a look at the 64-bit CWS >> (ooo64bit02) to see what data sizes they already changed. In view of the long-standing non

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

Hi Stephan, thanks for that announcement! - Added SAL_INT_CAST (for C) and > std::static_int_cast and Here (of course) sal::static_int_cast was meant ... std::reinterpret_int_cast (for C++) and here sal::reinterpret_int_cast. to sal/types.h That has already been correct in the code, t

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

From: Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 17:59:29 +0200 > free. We plan to do this massive (in number of files affected) change > for post--OOo-2.0. I forgot to ask in first e-mail. Post-2.0. You think of 2.1 or 3.0? Or? -- Pavel Janík Let your compiler do

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

From: Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 17:59:29 +0200 Hi, > Here at Sun Hamburg, we are eager to get OOo's C/C++ code base warning > free. great. Can you do all of your work on 64bit operating systems? ;-) > The team members should also have a look at t

Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code

On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 05:59:29PM +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > Hi all, > > Here at Sun Hamburg, we are eager to get OOo's C/C++ code base warning > free. We plan to do this massive (in number of files affected) change > for post--OOo-2.0. Since doing these changes needs close collaboratio

[dev] Warning-Free Code

Hi all, Here at Sun Hamburg, we are eager to get OOo's C/C++ code base warning free. We plan to do this massive (in number of files affected) change for post--OOo-2.0. Since doing these changes needs close collaboration (think of headers from one module that only cause warnings once they are

Re: [dev] warning

Hmm, I always supected it (can we get rid of some of this spam please, I like to get dev info, not rants.) Robin On 5/28/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > you are bad > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mai

[dev] warning

you are bad - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[dev] warning

here, the cheats - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[dev] warning

is that your account? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]