lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] s390 (7/13): gcc 3.3 adaptions.

    On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
    >
    > I think you must keep these warnings in! There are many bugs
    > that these uncover uncluding loops that don't terminate correctly
    > but seem to work for "most all" cases. These are the hard-to-find
    > bugs that hit you six months after release.

    At least historically gcc has been so f*cking bad at the "unsigned vs
    signed" warnings that they are totally useless.

    Maybe things are better in gcc-3.3.

    Maybe not.


    > size_t i;
    >
    > while((i = do_forever()) > 0)
    > ;
    >
    > ... do_forever() finally errors out and returns -1 stuck(forever).

    Does gcc still warn about things like

    #define COUNT (sizeof(array)/sizeof(element))

    int i;
    for (i = 0; i < COUNT; i++)
    ...

    where COUNT is obviously unsigned (because sizeof is size_t and thus
    unsigned)?

    Gcc used to complain about things like that, which is a FUCKING DISASTER.

    Any compiler that complains about the above should be shot in the head,
    and the warning should be killed.

    Linus

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.024 / U:1.512 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site