Home Original page

[Python-Dev] Compiler warnings

Thomas Wouters thomas at xs4all.net
Wed Feb 1 11:14:05 CET 2006 
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 08:16:21PM -0500, Tim Peters wrote:

> Is this version of gcc broken in some way relative to other gcc versions,
> or newer, or ... ?  We certainly don't want to see warnings under gcc,
> since it's heavily used, but I'm not clear on why other versions of gcc
> aren't producing these warnings (or are they, and people have been
> ignoring that?).

Well, I said 4.0.3, and that was wrong. It's actually a pre-release of 4.0.3
(in Debian's 'unstable' distribution.) However, 4.0.2 (the actual release)
behaves the same way. The normal make process shows quite a lot of output on
systems that use gcc, so I wouldn't be surprised if people did ignore it,
for the most part.

My main problem with fixing the warnings is that I don't see the difference
between, for example, the 'ssize' variable and the 'nchannels' variable in
linuxaudio's lad_obuffree/lad_bufsize/lad_obufcount. 'ssize' gets a warning,
'nchannels' doesn't, yet how they are treated is not particularly different.
The ssize output parameter gets set inside a switch, is directly followed by
a break, and the switch is directly followed by a set of the nchannels
output parameter. The only way through the switch is through the set of
ssize. I understand the compiler doesn't "see" it this way, but who knows
for how long :)

I guess we ignore this until we're closer to a 2.5alpha1 ;P

-- 
Thomas Wouters <thomas at xs4all.net>

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list