[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: portability checks, errors and warnings

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: portability checks, errors and warnings
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 13:13:50 -0800
User-agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)

Bruno Haible <address@hidden> writes:

> A linker warning with a one or two line text is better than a link error
> because
>   - We can enable a link warning even for cases where 90% of the uses of the
>     functions are ok, such as

For cases like these, I'd rather not have a warning, as there are too
many false alarms.

>   - A link errors aborts the "make" process, a link warning doesn't.

Hmm, we seem to be on different wavelengths here.  I want the 'make'
to fail if someone is using a function that should not be used.

For example, in the string module, I want 'make' to fail if any module
uses ctime, since it's asking for trouble in portable code (it has
undefined behavior with out-of-range time stamps).  I suppose someone
could write code that carefully bounds the time stamps and then uses
ctime; such code can "#undef ctime" if it really wants to.

Perhaps we're talking about different levels of severity here?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]