Eric Sunshine writes:
> Playing Devi's Advocate, what if Apple's clang "8" was, in reality,
> real-world clang 3? Then this condition would incorrectly enable the
> compiler option on Apple for a (real) clang version below 4. For this
> reason, it seems we shouldn't be trusting only the clang ver
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:48 AM Carlo Arenas wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 2:53 AM Eric Sunshine wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 5:06 AM Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
> > > +ifneq ($(filter clang10,$(COMPILER_FEATURES)),)
> > > +CFLAGS += -Wpedantic
> > > +endif
> >
> > Should this condition
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 2:53 AM Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 5:06 AM Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
> > +ifneq ($(filter clang10,$(COMPILER_FEATURES)),)
> > +CFLAGS += -Wpedantic
> > +endif
>
> Should this condition be tightened to match only for OSX since there
> is no such clang ve
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 5:06 AM Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
wrote:
> [...]
> -Wpedantic is only enabled for clang 10 or higher (only available in macOS
> with latest Xcode) but this restriction should be relaxed further as more
> environments are tested
We know from [1] that the clang version numb
DEVOPTS=pedantic adds -pedantic to the compiler flags, but misses on some
diagnostics when using clang, and that are only enabled with -Wpedantic
46c0eb5843 ("files-backend.c: fix build error on Solaris", 2018-11-25)
fixes an issue that was visible also with gcc but not clang so correct
that with
5 matches
Mail list logo
