[vox-tech] gcc and quieting warnings

[Peter Jay Salzman]

On Sun 04 Jun 06, 10:30 AM, Ken Bloom <kbloom at gmail.com> said:
> 
> Your problem isn't -Wall. It's -W (now called -Wextra)
> 
> from the man page:
> The following -W... options are not implied by -Wall.  Some of them
> warn about constructions that users generally do not consider question-
> able, but which occasionally you might wish to check for; others warn
> about constructions that are necessary or hard to avoid in some cases,
> and there is no simple way to modify the code to suppress the warning.
> 
> -Wextra
>     (This option used to be called -W.  The older name is still sup-
>     ported, but the newer name is more descriptive.)  Print extra warn-
>     ing messages for these events:
> [...]
>     *   If -Wall or -Wunused is also specified, warn about unused argu-
> 	ments.
> [...]
> 
> It seems to me that the following happens:
> -Wextra alone doesn't warn you about unused parameters.
> -Wall alone doesn't warn you about unused parameters.
> -Wall -Wextra does warn you about unused parameters.
> 
> Sad thing is most of the other conditions that -Wextra -Wall give you 
> seem to be worth checking for.
> 
> --Ken

That's really too bad.  I think something like splint's annotations would be
useful, especially in the early stages of a program's development when you
compile the program often, not necessarily to run the program, but to make
sure there are no "obvious" syntax errors as you code.

Oh well.  Thanks for the info!

Pete