On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 01:26:45AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
I think the question is whether a compiler can reasonably be expected to deduce that the source is fine. If that deduction involves solving the halting problem (or similar) hacking the source to avoid the warning actually doesn't occur to be that bad. ;-)
Nope, you can't depend on the compiler to verify your code is correct. That's why you should try to write it in such a way that people can understand it. Hacking the code to make the compiler happy at the cost of making the code less clear is not a good idea.
I think the real problem is that the code is just not clear enough. I've been meaning to add asserts. Where asserts are impractical: comments.
Does this mean you are going to submit some patches to address this?
If you tell me what options you build with and I can reproduce the warning then I'll be more than happy to try to fix it. I build widl with -W -Wall and get two warnings. One of which is in the bison-generated code; the other I sent a patch to silence and Alexandre rejected it.