[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: CVS commit: src/lib/libc/arch/arm/gen
David Young <dyoung%pobox.com@localhost> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:44:35AM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 09:05:36AM +0000, Hiroyuki Bessho wrote:
> > > Module Name: src
> > > Committed By: bsh
> > > Date: Wed Mar 21 09:05:36 UTC 2012
> > >
> > > Modified Files:
> > > src/lib/libc/arch/arm/gen: _lwp.c
> > >
> > > Log Message:
> > > shut up lint(1)
> > So the question is still -- how much do we want to uglify our code?
> Joerg, please make a positive suggestion instead of sniping at
> developers in this way.
It is much more worth to invest time in: 1) having WARNS=4 for code where
this is still (!) unused 2) better integration with different compilers
3) just looking for more advanced static analysers that lint in our tree.
For example, Coverity was quite useful (unfortunately inactive these days).
I am sure there are other good analysers, but the point being is that our
lint(1) causes more churn and damage (due to reduced code readability, as
well as build breakages) than benefit (if any, as recent gcc and llvm just
seem to be superior in detecting all sorts of problems).
In such context, NOLINT is quite positive suggestion.
Main Index |
Thread Index |