Re: RFC: Use -Wall -Wextra

Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-12-30T16:00:41Z

On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 05:32:26PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > I think neither of us is actually talking about -Walways-true.
>
> Maybe. I was talking about this one (happens with yesterday's
> snapshot):
>
> gcc -c -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.././readline -DRL_LIBRARY_VERSION='"5.1"' -g -O2 bind.c
> bind.c: In function 'rl_function_of_keyseq':
> bind.c:682: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
> rm -f display.o
> gcc -c -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.././readline -DRL_LIBRARY_VERSION='"5.1"' -g -O2 display.c
> display.c: In function 'rl_character_len':
> display.c:1844: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
>
> It looks like this happens even without -Wall. What a screwup!

OK, that's a whole different one - and yes, it's unconditional. I
meant this one:

warning: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true

That's controlled by -Wextra directly.

Anyway, let's go with -Wall; that's still an improvement over the
present state and fixes the annoying -Wuninitialized warnings. I'll
commit my saved up warning fixes, and then post a patch to do this.

> > Thanks. That comes from the default definition of a macro which no
> > longer has any non-default definitions; we may as well garbage collect
> > it. I don't know why I didn't get the warning; I can provoke it for
> > a small testcase.
> >
> > I'll remove the macro, since that's an unrelated cleanup.
>
> I'll wait for the patch, thanks.

Done now, in a separate message.