svn commit: r201227 - in head: sbin/comcontrol sbin/mount sbin/mount_msdosfs sbin/mount_nullfs sbin/rcorder usr.bin/find usr.bin/gencat usr.bin/mklocale usr.sbin/config usr.sbin/cpucontrol usr.sbin...

[Xin LI]

On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 10:22 PM, Ed Schouten <ed at 80386.nl> wrote:
> Hi Gabor,
>
> * Gabor Kovesdan <gabor at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>> I wonder if it would be worth to invent a WARNS=7 level, which would
>> be WARNS=6 + ANSI. Although ANSI-conformance isn't a -Wfoo flag,
>> which is WARNS for but conforming ANSI means a higher level
>> cleannes, which is demanded, so I think it wouldn't really
>> contradict to the semantics of WARNS.
>
> So far I've been using -Wold-style-definition, which I've been using
> make these changes. I am planning on just adding that to WARNS=6,
> considering that almost all the code at WARNS=6 builds with this flag
> enabled now.
>
> I'd rather not add a WARNS=7, because then I'm afraid almost nobody will
> know about its existence, causing it to be mostly ignored. In an ideal
> world, I think we should get rid of WARNS. We could just enable all -W
> flags by default, except -Werror. That way people would be invited to
> fix the warnings over time.

Probably leaving -Werror by default is better...  Without -Werror I
think there is fewer chance that these issues being noticed.  The
point of having -Werror is that it means a build break (at the
developers' local machine, or tinderbox if he or she didn't do a full
universe build), loud enough and can be fixed early rather than
letting them go.  Historically we only disable -Werror when major
compiler change, etc.

Cheers,
-- 
Xin LI <delphij at delphij.net> http://www.delphij.net