Ulf Lamping wrote:
Jeff Morriss wrote:
Actually GCC already has a way to avoid this: "-Wno-pointer-sign".
Apparently:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg00505.html
someone didn't like the fact that Linux had a few thousand such warnings
when compiled with GCC 4.
We could add that and probably cut down the number of GCC warnings by,
well, a few thousand.
Unfortunately I can't quite seem to figure out how to (correctly) test
if GCC will accept the option, though. Any ideas?
Well, you can disable almost any gcc warning, but that is not the point.
It's about *fixing* warnings, not *ignoring* them :-)
In fact I meant it just as a stop-gap until someone (smarter--or at
least with more than to dedicate to the purpose--than me) can fix
Wireshark's unsigned-vs-signed char problem.
As it is, I have to scroll through hundreds of (probably not fixable by
me) warnings just to get to things I have a chance of fixing. There's
so many that my eyes glaze over as I'm looking for warnings--which makes
it hard to detect "real" (read: "things I can do something about") warnings.
When I've gone on warning-fixing kicks I've resorted to doing:
% grep -i warn make.out | grep -iv "signed" | less
to find the ("real") warnings. :-(
