Re[2]: [lmi] MinGW gcc-4.3, and .tar.lzma

[Vadim Zeitlin]

On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 01:31:15 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:

GC> On 2008-08-30 01:08Z, Greg Chicares wrote:
GC> [...]
GC> >>  Just FYI: I recently saw a link to experimental 4.3.2 packages available
GC> >> on http://www.tdragon.net/recentgcc/index.php
GC> 
GC> BTW, I tried a similar gcc-4.x a few months ago. I think it would
GC> be a mistake to try to make every conceivable diagnostic go away
GC> by contorting the code. IIRC, the worst one was that it disliked
GC> 
GC>   if(0.0 == d) // Yes, indeed: test for exact zero! Really!

 The problem is that this warning often is correct so disabling it is
dangerous IMO. We did do it for wx too, with wxIsSameDouble() function
(although I don't think it actually works, i.e. suppresses the warning, for
g++ -- it's a pity that it doesn't have any warning control pragmas) but
this is just the path of least resistance.

GC> so I think I turned that one off. Here's the relevant part of an
GC> unapplied local patch; I don't recall the reason for inhibiting
GC> each of these warnings, but IIRC the reasons will become obvious
GC> if you don't inhibit them.
GC> 
GC> +ifeq (4.3.0,$(gcc_version))
GC> +  # Suppress spurious gcc-4.3.0 warnings:
GC> +  gcc_version_specific_warnings := \
GC> +    -Wno-array-bounds \
GC> +    -Wno-attributes \
GC> +    -Wno-conversion \
GC> +    -Wno-parentheses \
GC> +    -Wno-uninitialized \
GC> +    -Wno-unused \
GC> +endif

 Thanks, I'll see if some of them can be left enabled.
VZ