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, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> |>
> |> Gcc used to complain about things like that, which is a FUCKING DISASTER.
>
> How can you distinguish that from other occurrences of (int)<(size_t)?

Which is indeed my point. If you cannot distinguish it from incorrect
uses, you shouldn't be warnign the user, because the compiler obviously
doesn't know enough to make a sufficiently educated guess.

That said, a good compiler _can_ make a good warning. But to do so, you
have to actually do value analysis, instead of just blindly warning about
code that is obviously correct to a human.

Until gcc does sufficient value analysis, that signed warning is annoying,
worthless and a damn pain in the ass.

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:0.056 / U:0.600 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site