Message87693
> There is a lot of value in being able to compile with -Wstrict-overflow > and know that every warning omitted is something to be looked at. I agree in principle; this certainly applies to -Wall. But -Wstrict- overflow doesn't do a particularly good job of finding signed overflow cases: there are a good few false positives, and it doesn't pick up the many cases of actual everyday signed overflow e.g., in unicode_hash, byteshash, set_lookkey, etc.), so it doesn't seem a particular good basis for code rewriting. | |
Date | User | Action | Args | 2009-05-13 16:45:43 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients: + mark.dickinson, gvanrossum, loewis, nnorwitz, gregory.p.smith, pitrou, vstinner, christian.heimes, alexandre.vassalotti, donmez, matejcik | 2009-05-13 16:45:42 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1242233142.74.0.8338713285.issue1621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> | 2009-05-13 16:45:41 | mark.dickinson | link | issue1621 messages | 2009-05-13 16:45:40 | mark.dickinson | create | | |