[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
playing w/ GCC warnings
From: |
Thien-Thi Nguyen |
Subject: |
playing w/ GCC warnings |
Date: |
Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:07:00 +0200 |
What do people do to make experimentation w/ GCC warnings easy?
In Guile-PG's configure.in, there is:
|## If we're using GCC, ask for aggressive warnings.
|if test x"$GCC" = xyes ; then
| AGGRESSIVE_WARNINGS="-std=gnu99 -pedantic"
| for x in all extra float-equal declaration-after-statement \
| undef shadow pointer-arith cast-qual cast-align aggregate-return \
| old-style-definition no-missing-field-initializers \
| nested-externs inline volatile-register-var disabled-optimization
| do AGGRESSIVE_WARNINGS="$AGGRESSIVE_WARNINGS -W$x"
| done
|fi
|AC_SUBST([AGGRESSIVE_WARNINGS])
and in the src/Makefile.am:
| AM_CFLAGS = $(AGGRESSIVE_WARNINGS) $(MORE_AGGRESSIVE_WARNINGS)
I do this in order to not touch CFLAGS. I wonder if this is
contra-indicated somehow, and if not, if the result can be
achieved in a better (more idiomatic, more "standard") way.
thi
- playing w/ GCC warnings,
Thien-Thi Nguyen <=