RFC: Avoiding #warning (C/C++ preprocessor extension)

[George Staikos]

On Tuesday 01 November 2005 08:34, Mirko Boehm wrote:
> On Monday 31 October 2005 23:15, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> > > I would
> > > say that no release tarball should contain -Werror.  It may be useful
> > > during development but it would be unnecessarily painful for release.
> >
> > ... so you cannot even have it in development, except if everybody would
> > use the same gcc version.
>
> Why not? It can be used as a standard during development, and removed
> before the release.
>
> On the other hand, I do not see the point. Removing annoying "unused
> parameter" warnings should be a habit, no need to make the compiler barf at
> the first point where it encounters it. What is wrong with letting make
> finish the compile, and then removing all the warnings at once?

  I use unused parameter warnings as a form of TODO.  If there is meaning to 
have them not used, they get Q_UNUSED.  If they will be used at some point 
and that code just isn't implemented, I don't touch them so I remember to fix 
it.

> Forcing -Werror is too much of an annoyance, I think.

  I definitely agree.

-- 
George Staikos
KDE Developer				http://www.kde.org/
Staikos Computing Services Inc.		http://www.staikos.net/