From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13203 invoked by alias); 23 Nov 2011 20:16:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 13194 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Nov 2011 20:16:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 20:16:18 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F9602BB1FF; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:16:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id jz+D-bjgo0Sl; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:16:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A74F2BB12B; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:16:17 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 15851145615; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:16:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 20:16:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Doug Evans Cc: Andrey Smirnov , Mike Frysinger , gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/348] Fix -Wsahdow warnings Message-ID: <20111123201613.GO13809@adacore.com> References: <878vn88fw3.fsf@gmail.com> <4ECBA525.1010801@redhat.com> <201111221027.52484.vapier@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-11/txt/msg00654.txt.bz2 > > Also, given the quantity, I'd suggest holding off until after 7.4 is branched. > > [just a suggestion though] > > Heh, OTOH ... > It will make backporting fixes into the 7.4 branch harder if a lot go > in right after it's branched. > That suggests holding off until 7.4 is close to going out. > > OTOOH, holding off too long will just make it harder for you to keep > your patches up to date. > But I wouldn't hold up 7.4 for these changes. > > In the end I think the high order bit is not making it too difficult > to backport fixes into the 7.4 branch. I agree that the priority is to make merging easy. I'm also starting to question the benefits vs cost of enabling -Wshadow. In particular, warnings that for us to change the name of function parameters such as "block_found" or "index" make me feel like this is going too far. I think it's useful to review the warnings, because it did find some real situation where we were shadowing another variable from an outer scope. But I tend to disagree with a good portion of the warnings I am seeing right now. Add the fact that the warnings also depend on the host's system includes, and you might be as uncomfortable as I am... -- Joel