lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Sep]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sched: Remove nested extern
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 09:41:44AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Rustad, Mark D <mark.d.rustad@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 22, 2014, at 2:21 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 08:59:32PM +0000, Rustad, Mark D wrote:
> > >> Because I have found that enabling many warnings helps identify problems
> > >> in code and it has been my standard practice since about 1999 to do so.
> > >> The compiler warnings are really just another form of static analysis,
> > >> and I use it routinely on every compile. Here is how routinely: I have
> > >> W=1 in my environment, W=12 is just too painful. I would change that
> > >> default to W=12 if it wasn't insane to do so.
> > >
> > > Many warnings are just plain insane and stupid. They're not
> > > helping anybody. There's a very good reason many are
> > > disabled. I'm sure you can find some entertaining discussions
> > > on the topic if you search the LKML archives.
> >
> > That is what I used to think. -Wshadow for example. What's the
> > problem? [...]
>
> Then please add it to the default build. There are some warnings
> that used to be crap but have been improved over the year -
> enable them one by one, with good case by case justification and
> analysis. Just going after all W=2 warnings is insane.

So I don't like the nested extern one because it either means not using
that language feature at all or pooping all over your code with that
DECL crap. That just a loose-loose proposition.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-09-24 10:21    [W:0.063 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site