Re: gratuitous gcc warnings: unused function arguments?

From: David O'Brien <obrien_at_freebsd.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:36:55 -0800
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 07:51:35PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 9:05 PM +0000 1/16/05, Robert Watson wrote:
> >On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, David O'Brien wrote:
> > > We're not going to hack GCC to deal with this.  That is going way
> > > too far.  This is coming up because people are using high WARNS
> > > values in Makefiles.  Either back them down to a lower WARNS value;
> > > or we should add -Wno-unused-parameter to WARNS level 3.
> >
> >I'd be fine with simply pushing threshold for unused parameters up
> >a few notches on the warning scale.  I'd like to have access to the
> >other interesting warnings are WARNS=3 and WARNS=4 relating to
> >qualifiers, strings, etc.
> 
> I think it would be useful to keep that warning "in general", but
> have an option to turn it off.  The following seems to work for me,
> assuming we can decide on the best name for a new NO_WUNUSED_ARGS
> option:

Do you have a piece of code that exhibits this warning but otherwise
could pass at higher warning level?  I'm reisitance to adding a lot of
NO_FOO_WARNING knobs.  Otherwise we might as well as remove the whole
WARNS thing and set each warning a Makefile wants.
 
-- 
-- David  (obrien_at_FreeBSD.org)
Received on Mon Jan 17 2005 - 04:36:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:26 UTC