• =?UTF-8?B?Ik5vcmRsw7Z3Ig==?= (7/7) May 26 2014 I've recent fixed a few warnings in D here:
• andro (4/11) May 27 2014 Well, I gathered some of warnings I have come across while doing
• =?UTF-8?B?Ik5vcmRsw7Z3Ig==?= (2/2) May 28 2014 Great!
• Dicebot (4/11) May 28 2014 I don't think it is worth spending too much time on it because of
• bearophile (7/10) May 28 2014 Some of those warnings are not generated by D compiler (like
• =?UTF-8?B?Ik5vcmRsw7Z3Ig==?= (2/6) May 28 2014 I completely agree.
• bearophile (6/10) May 29 2014 In D I'd like optional warnings for unused
• Dicebot (3/13) May 29 2014 unused variables are job for dscanner
• bearophile (10/12) May 29 2014 Unused variables/labels/arguments and unused last assignments are
• Dicebot (7/17) May 29 2014 And even more often those are side effect of active debugging and

=?UTF-8?B?Ik5vcmRsw7Z3Ig==?= <per.nordlow gmail.com> writes:

I've recent fixed a few warnings in D here:

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3543

At the end of the thread I asked:

Should I continue fixing GLUE, BACK and ROOT or focus on 
remaining warnings in DMD?

but Walter has not responded so I'm asking it here once again.

Comments anyone?

"andro" <my email.foo> writes:

On Monday, 26 May 2014 at 20:58:22 UTC, Nordlöw wrote:
 I've recent fixed a few warnings in D here:

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3543

 At the end of the thread I asked:

 Should I continue fixing GLUE, BACK and ROOT or focus on 
 remaining warnings in DMD?

 but Walter has not responded so I'm asking it here once again.

 Comments anyone?

Well, I gathered some of warnings I have come across while doing 
some code browsning.

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3598

=?UTF-8?B?Ik5vcmRsw7Z3Ig==?= <per.nordlow gmail.com> writes:

Great!

Thx

"Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:

On Monday, 26 May 2014 at 20:58:22 UTC, Nordlöw wrote:
 I've recent fixed a few warnings in D here:

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3543

 At the end of the thread I asked:

 Should I continue fixing GLUE, BACK and ROOT or focus on 
 remaining warnings in DMD?

 but Walter has not responded so I'm asking it here once again.

 Comments anyone?

I don't think it is worth spending too much time on it because of 
ongoing DDMD transition which will make many of those issues 
obsolete.

"bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

Dicebot:

 I don't think it is worth spending too much time on it because 
 of ongoing DDMD transition which will make many of those issues 
 obsolete.

Some of those warnings are not generated by D compiler (like 
unused variables and labels, unused arguments, signed/unsigned 
comparisons, etc), so better to catch and fix them before porting 
the code to D.

Bye,
bearophile

=?UTF-8?B?Ik5vcmRsw7Z3Ig==?= <per.nordlow gmail.com> writes:

 Some of those warnings are not generated by D compiler (like 
 unused variables and labels, unused arguments, signed/unsigned 
 comparisons, etc), so better to catch and fix them before 
 porting the code to D.

I completely agree.

/Per

"bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

 Some of those warnings are not generated by D compiler (like 
 unused variables and labels, unused arguments, signed/unsigned 
 comparisons, etc), so better to catch and fix them before 
 porting the code to D.

In D I'd like optional warnings for unused 
variables/labels/arguments/last assignments, and for 
signed-unsigned comparisons. Such basic things are not a job for 
Dscanner.

Bye,
bearophile

"Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:

On Thursday, 29 May 2014 at 09:35:26 UTC, bearophile wrote:
 Some of those warnings are not generated by D compiler (like 
 unused variables and labels, unused arguments, signed/unsigned 
 comparisons, etc), so better to catch and fix them before 
 porting the code to D.

 In D I'd like optional warnings for unused 
 variables/labels/arguments/last assignments, and for 
 signed-unsigned comparisons. Such basic things are not a job 
 for Dscanner.

 Bye,
 bearophile

unused variables are job for dscanner
signed-unsigned comparison should be an error, not warning

"bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

Dicebot:

 unused variables are job for dscanner

Unused variables/labels/arguments and unused last assignments are 
often flags for code problems (but the ones in the function/class 
you are writing now). I like how such tests are done by the 
GCC/Clang compilers.


 signed-unsigned comparison should be an error, not warning

I don't know if Rust does this. But isn't it a little late for D? 
And aren't such errors going to introduce even more dangerous 
casts?

Bye,
bearophile

"Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:

On Thursday, 29 May 2014 at 20:49:04 UTC, bearophile wrote:
 Dicebot:

 unused variables are job for dscanner

 Unused variables/labels/arguments and unused last assignments 
 are often flags for code problems (but the ones in the 
 function/class you are writing now). I like how such tests are 
 done by the GCC/Clang compilers.

And even more often those are side effect of active debugging and 
indicate no issues.

 signed-unsigned comparison should be an error, not warning

 I don't know if Rust does this. But isn't it a little late for 
 D? And aren't such errors going to introduce even more 
 dangerous casts?

If it is late for an error, it is late for a warning too. Thus -> 
DScanner.

You are very unlikely to convince me there is even a single 
legitimate use case for warnings other than deprecation cycle ;)