Emil Dotchevski wrote:
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Gottlob Frege <gottlobfrege@gmail.com> wrote:
Hard to find, but it was there:
Once you get to 0, warnings will find more bugs than they cause, but not during the drive to 0
Ah.
I think everyone agrees 0 warnings are worthwhile (mostly to increase visibility of new warnings, some of which will flag real bugs).
We are all at close to 0 warnings, just accept that. The difference is only in what level of warnings a particular developer is most comfortable with. We are all reasonable people and I think that it is safe to assume that none of us are sloppy in that selection.
Note also #pragma GCC system_header used in the GCC standard library. Easy solution to the same problem. This also indicates that they didn't think that "fixing" all warnings in STL was a better idea, but I guess we're better than those hackers.
Well, when you implement a standard library for a particular compiler, you are allowed (and in some places even required) to use code that isn't portable. Writing a highly portable library is a totally different thing. Bo Persson