Subject: Re: Style guide
To: D'Arcy J.M. Cain <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <email@example.com>
Date: 05/28/1997 10:53:56
> with a different tool in a different environment. That's why I tend
> to eschew lint in favour of compiling with this:
> CFLAGS = -O2 -pipe -ansi -Wall -Wshadow -Wpointer-arith -Wcast-qual \
> -Wwrite-strings -Werror -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes \
> -funsigned-char -Dscanf=DONT_USE_SCANF -Dgets=DONT_USE_GETS
> This catches just about any error that lint will and probably some that
> lint won't. In addition, the tool that does the compile is the tool that
> does the checking and it does it under the exact same conditions. Passing
> this test makes me more comfortable than passing lint.
That actually doesn't check a whole class of problems that lint does.
The whole "nconsistent declaration of a global variable or function" thing.
yes, _assuming consistent include files_, you should be safe, but the
point is that it's hard to know that your program, libraries, etc.,
were compiled with consistent includes files. lint will tell you.