Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Buildbot compile flags
From: Stephen Fisher <stephentfisher@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:01:50 -0700
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 07:47:35PM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> On Mar 22, 2007, at 7:10 PM, Stephen Fisher wrote:

> > ber.c:70: warning: ISO C90 does not support the `ll' printf length 
> > modifier
> ...and if I compile
> 	long long int
> 	fnord(long long int foo)
> 	{
> 		return foo + 17;
> 	}
> with "gcc -O2 -Wall -W -pedantic -c fnord.c", I get
> 	fnord.c:1: warning: ISO C90 does not support ???long long???
> 	fnord.c:2: warning: ISO C90 does not support ???long long???
> (GCC 4.x).
> I think -pedantic is a hopeless cause here; the only way to get it to 
> keep quiet would be to get rid of FT_INT64/FT_UINT64 and everything 
> else that uses 64-bit integral data types, or to support them only in 
> 64-bit environments (which means no support on most of the desktop 
> machines on which Wireshark is run; someday, they'll all be 64-bit, 
> and maybe even be running in 64-bit environments, but that's probably 
> a few years off).

The alternative is to compile with -std=c99 for the long long case, but 
do we really want to do that?  I agree that -pedantic is a bit too much 
to tackle, at least for now.  Let's work on warnings with the usual 
flags for now.