[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gcc
Subject:    Re: Should -Wjump-misses-init be in -Wall?
From:       Mark Mitchell <mark () codesourcery ! com>
Date:       2009-06-30 16:55:45
Message-ID: 4A4A4391.7080406 () codesourcery ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I recently added the new -Wjump-misses-init warning option.  It warns
> when a goto or switch jumps into the scope of an initialized variable
> without actually initializing the variable.  I added the warning to
> -Wall because it seems to me to fit the criteria of -Wall: a dubious
> code practice which is easy to avoid.

> Any opinions on this?  Should I take the new warning out of -Wall?

Having read through this thread, I think that putting this in -Wall is
the right thing.  I'm very sensitive to the backwards-compatibility
issues, but I don't think that trying never to emit new errors with
-Wall is a sensible kind of backwards compatibility.

Thanks,

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]