Re: Where are the specific WARNS=n defined?

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 03:11:27AM -0400, Mouse wrote:
 > >>>> [...] gcc errors due to comparison of signed and unsigned values.
 > >>> It is best to fix the errors.
 > >> In my experience, that warning produces so many more false positives
 > >> than useful warnings that I normally shut it off entirely.
 > > and that one time that using it might have warned you about a serious
 > > vulnerability?
 > 
 > When was that?
 > 
 > Except for a few that also provoked, or would have provoked, the
 > warning about how a conditional's value is constant "due to limited
 > range of data type", I can't recall ever finding a bug that
 > -Wsign-compare warned about (or would have warned about).
 > 
 > Ever.
 > 
 > In anyone's code.

The most recent one I ran into (that's easily documentable and had
clear adverse consequences) was PR 43413.

Just FWIW.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost