On 12/7/25 06:24, Uri Lublin wrote:
On Sun, Dec 7, 2025 at 3:07 AM Nicholas Vinson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    On 12/6/25 18:38, Uri Lublin wrote:
     > On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 10:54 AM Nicholas Vinson
    <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
     > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
     >
     >     Disable the -Wmissing-braces warning as it suggests adding
    braces to
     >     designated initializes in a manner that violates C++20 rules.
     >
     >     Signed-off-by: Nicholas Vinson <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>
     >     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
     >     ---
     >       m4/spice-compile-warnings.m4 | 1 +
     >       1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
     >
     >     diff --git a/m4/spice-compile-warnings.m4 b/m4/spice-compile-
    warnings.m4
     >     index abe4a912..d2e1acc8 100644
     >     --- a/m4/spice-compile-warnings.m4
     >     +++ b/m4/spice-compile-warnings.m4
     >     @@ -84,6 +84,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([SPICE_COMPILE_WARNINGS],[
     >           dontwarn="$dontwarn -Wstrict-prototypes"
     >           dontwarn="$dontwarn -Wsuggest-final-methods"
     >           dontwarn="$dontwarn -Wsuggest-final-types"
     >     +    dontwarn="$dontwarn -Wmissing-braces"
     >
     >
     > Probably better to (also?) remove "-Wmissing-braces" from the
     > list iterated by  gl_manywarn_item.

    Just before gl_manywarn_item there is a comment that says "List all gcc
    warning categories". That comment is why I did not remove it from the
    gl_manywarn_item list.

    It seemed more logically consistent to me to place it in the list and
    then use the dontwarn feature to disable the flag.


Hi Nicholas,

I think you're right.
The right way to do it is to add flags to "dontwarn".

What about the patch order, does that make sense to you ?

The updated patch order makes sense to me. I'll respin the patch set so the m4 changes are first.

Thanks,
Nicholas Vinson


Thanks,
     Uri.

    That said, I am amenable to either approach; I just would want to make
    sure everyone is OK with the requested change.

    Thanks,
    Nicholas Vinson

     >
     > I suggest applying the m4 patch first (and g++ fix second) such
     > that the build works after the first patch is applied.
     >
     > Thanks,
     >      Uri
     >
     >
     >           # Get all possible GCC warnings
     >           gl_MANYWARN_ALL_GCC([maybewarn])
     >     --
     >     2.52.0
     >


Reply via email to