Re: compiler warnings on the buildfarm

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: compiler warnings on the buildfarm
Date: 2007-07-12 14:07:09
Message-ID: 17428.1184249229@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> What is the official stance on handling compiler warnings?

The compilers I use give me 1 or 2 warnings on HEAD, coming from flex's
sloppiness about not generating unused code. I wouldn't care to work
with a compiler that generated more than a few. At the same time,
I'm not prepared to contort the source code unduly to suppress what
you referred to as "spam" warnings from over-chatty compilers.

What would probably be useful if you want to pursue this is to filter
out the obvious spam like statement-not-reached, and see what's left.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleg Bartunov 2007-07-12 14:08:10 Re: tsearch2: language or encoding
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-07-12 13:54:28 Re: Need help with autoconf