Message60114
| Author | gvanrossum |
|---|---|
| Recipients | alexandre.vassalotti, christian.heimes, donmez, gregory.p.smith, gvanrossum, loewis |
| Date | 2008-01-18.20:47:53 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.009264955 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1200689275.2.0.686844362416.issue1621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
The proper thing to do here is to add -Werror=strict-overflow to the CFLAGS (*before* -Wall -- we should fix the position of -Wall!); this will turn all those spots into errors, forcing us to fix them, and alerting users who might be using a newer compiler than we tested with. This should be done in favor of -fwrapv, but only if strict-overflow is supported (which we can find out in the same way as we found out whether -fwrapv is supported). I think in practice this means GCC 4.2 or newer. Can someone come up with a patch? |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008-01-18 20:47:55 | gvanrossum | set | spambayes_score: 0.00926496 -> 0.009264955 recipients: + gvanrossum, loewis, gregory.p.smith, christian.heimes, alexandre.vassalotti, donmez |
| 2008-01-18 20:47:55 | gvanrossum | set | spambayes_score: 0.00926496 -> 0.00926496 messageid: <1200689275.2.0.686844362416.issue1621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008-01-18 20:47:53 | gvanrossum | link | issue1621 messages |
| 2008-01-18 20:47:53 | gvanrossum | create | |