Message87693
> There is a lot of value in being able to compile with -Wstrict-overflow
> and know that every warning omitted is something to be looked at.
I agree in principle; this certainly applies to -Wall. But -Wstrict-
overflow doesn't do a particularly good job of finding signed overflow
cases: there are a good few false positives, and it doesn't pick up
the many cases of actual everyday signed overflow e.g., in unicode_hash,
byteshash, set_lookkey, etc.), so it doesn't seem a particular good basis
for code rewriting. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2009-05-13 16:45:43 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients:
+ mark.dickinson, gvanrossum, loewis, nnorwitz, gregory.p.smith, pitrou, vstinner, christian.heimes, alexandre.vassalotti, donmez, matejcik |
2009-05-13 16:45:42 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1242233142.74.0.8338713285.issue1621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2009-05-13 16:45:41 | mark.dickinson | link | issue1621 messages |
2009-05-13 16:45:40 | mark.dickinson | create | |
|