Re: silent rules and warnings

[Mike Miller]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 17:32:33 -0500, John W. Eaton wrote:
> I checked in a series of changes that reduced the number of warnings in the
> build.  For my build on a Debian system, I only see a few warnings now.  I'd
> like to eliminate all of them, but there are a few from code generated by
> flex that I see no easy way to eliminate.  In any case, my hope is that we
> can prevent any new warnings from appearing and keep the build clean.
>
> I also checked in a change to make the --enable-silent-rules configure
> option much more useful.  Perhaps we should enable this by default?  The
> terse output of silent rules used to annoy me because I never seemed to be
> able to figure out how to get the full command output when it was needed for
> debugging.  But with Makefiles generated by automake, it is as simple as
> passing V=1 to make.  So I don't really see a downside of enabling silent
> rules by default for all builds.  The big positive benefit for me is that
> warnings and errors are much more visible and it will be more obvious when
> some code is added that accidentally produces a warning.
>
> Is there any objection to enabling silent rules by default?

Yes please! :) I always build with V=0 for that same reason (and
looking forward to trying the build with your latest changes).

I doubt there's anything we could do about the warnings from
flex-generated code. However, to silence those warnings specifically
we could drop a #pragma at the top of the generated file to disable
the old-style-cast or unused-parameter or whichever warnings trigger
for that one file.

-- 
mike