Re: findings on swig-java-bindings

On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 12:10:14AM +0000, Philip Martin wrote:
> It's possible these warnings are false alarms, but if they are not
> then the code is broken, and it may get miscompiled by compilers other
> than gcc. If we hide the warnings in the normal development
> environment there is less incentive to fix the code, or even
> investigate if we really have a problem.
>
> On the other hand if gcc really is going to produce invalid object
> code from our invalid source code then it seems sensible to enable
> this for production. Perhaps this flag should only be added if
> enable-maintainer-mode is not used?

Has anyone actually tried to fix these warnings yet? As opposed to just
hiding them?

-- 
Ben Reser <ben@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org