Message168590
(As usual), I'm quite skeptical about this "bulk bug report"; it violates the "one bug at a time" principle, where "one bug" can roughly be defined as "cannot be split into smaller independent issues".
For the cases at hand, I think it would be best if somebody with gcc 4.6 available just fixed the "easy" ones, i.e. where the code clearly improves when silenciing the warning. In these cases, I wouldn't mind if they get checked in without code review; I know some favor review for all changes, in which case a separate issue should be opened for a patch fixing a bunch of these.
The more difficult ones may deserve their own issues (e.g. when it is debatable whether gcc is right to warn about the code) |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2012-08-19 19:25:42 | loewis | set | recipients:
+ loewis, brett.cannon, terry.reedy, jcea, vstinner, python-dev, poolie, kidanger |
2012-08-19 19:25:42 | loewis | set | messageid: <1345404342.61.0.60553703235.issue10951@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2012-08-19 19:25:21 | loewis | link | issue10951 messages |
2012-08-19 19:25:21 | loewis | create | |
|