Re: [OFF TOPIC] was: Segfault in free()...C++
>
> On Sep 4, 1997, at 09:10, E.L. Meijer (Eric) wrote:
> > Jeff Gunter:
> > Wildly off topic, but a fun view into `commercial quality software', let
> > me show you the output of CC under IRIX 64 with the following
> > application:
> >
> > hw.cc:
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > #include <iostream.h>
> > int main() { cout << "Hello world." << endl; return 0; }
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > CC -fullwarn -o hw hw.cc
> > "/usr/include/CC/iostream.h", line 236: remark(1506): implicit
> > conversion from
> > "long" to "int": rounding, sign extension, or loss of
> > accuracy may
> > result
> > x_blen= (eb>b) ? (eb-b) : 0 ;
> > ^
> >
> > "/usr/include/CC/iostream.h", line 265: remark(1506): implicit
> > conversion from
> > "long" to "int": rounding, sign extension, or loss of
> > accuracy may
> > result
> > return x_gptr<x_egptr ? x_egptr-x_gptr : 0 ;
> > ^
> >
> > "/usr/include/CC/iostream.h", line 270: remark(1506): implicit
> > conversion from
> > "long" to "int": rounding, sign extension, or loss of
> > accuracy may
> > result
> > if ( x_pptr ) return x_pptr-x_pbase ;
> > ^
> >
> > "/usr/include/CC/iostream.h", line 646: remark(1430): omission of
> > "class" is
> > nonstandard
> > friend ios ;
> > ^
> >
> > "/usr/include/CC/iostream.h", line 650: remark(1174): variable
> > "iostream_init"
> > was declared but never referenced
> > } iostream_init ;
> > ^
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > The 64 bit compiler doesn't seem to agree with itself!
>
> Well, "remarks" are just that: comments the compiler has regarding
> some non-standard, perhaps non-portable and not-so-secure assumptions
> you MAY have made in your code.
You didn't look carefully enough, or you don't understand what is
there. These warnings are about a header file that ships with the
compiler, not about my code! I usually want my code to compile cleanly
at the highest warning level. It becomes very hard to check if there
are any warnings in my code if the compiler reports loads of drivel in
its system headers. Besides that things like `implicit conversion from
long to int' are not necessarily harmless.
> Nothing more, nothing less. They can
> be safely ignored for the greatest part.
`Safely ignoring' warnings is the ultimate route to creating software
that will be hard to maintain and difficult to port, IMHO.
Eric Meijer
--
E.L. Meijer (tgakem@chem.tue.nl) | tel. office +31 40 2472189
Eindhoven Univ. of Technology | tel. lab. +31 40 2475032
Lab. for Catalysis and Inorg. Chem. (TAK) | tel. fax +31 40 2455054
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: