tinycc-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Tinycc-devel] Can you consider to add -Werror option?


From: Thomas Preudhomme
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] Can you consider to add -Werror option?
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:12:44 +0800
User-agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.7.2

Le 2014-02-10 03:33, grischka a écrit :
Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
In the case of tinycc there are many unused-variable due to conditionals so that kind of warning ought to be ignored.

I don't see any such on win32 currently except
    tccelf.c:1511:14: warning: 'fill_got_entry' defined but not used
which seems you just have introduced. ;=)

Fixed. Strange, there was quite some warning on gv in tccgen.c some time ago. And in x86-64.c as well. But there is still a few warnings on c67:

gcc -o c67-tcc tcc.c -DONE_SOURCE -DTCC_TARGET_C67 -I. -Wall -g -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wno-pointer-sign -Wno-sign-compare -Wno-unused-result -lm -ldl
In file included from libtcc.c:49:0,
                 from tcc.c:22:
c67-gen.c: In function ‘gen_opi’:
c67-gen.c:2141:16: warning: variable ‘opc’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
     int r, fr, opc, t;
                ^
c67-gen.c: In function ‘gen_opf’:
c67-gen.c:2301:13: warning: variable ‘fc’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
     int ft, fc, fr, r;
             ^
In file included from libtcc.c:61:0,
                 from tcc.c:22:
tcccoff.c: In function ‘tcc_output_coff’:
tcccoff.c:199:31: warning: variable ‘last_pc’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
      unsigned long func_addr, last_pc, pc;
                               ^
tcccoff.c:384:18: warning: variable ‘incl_files’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
      const char *incl_files[INCLUDE_STACK_SIZE];
                  ^
In file included from libtcc.c:40:0,
                 from tcc.c:22:
tcc.c: At top level:
tccelf.c:1511:14: warning: ‘fill_got_entry’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
 ST_FUNC void fill_got_entry(TCCState *s1, ElfW_Rel *rel)
              ^


Whatever.  Just don't forget the TinyCC principle.

Sure. Anyway we masked them out with a --no-ignored-result kind of switch.


M2c,

What does this stand for?

Cheers,

Thomas



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]