Tips from the compiler

[Don]

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote in message 
> news:mailman.693.1287403175.858.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
>> I, for one, want the compiler to tell you about things that are either
>> absolutely guaranteed to be a problem or things which are _highly_ likely 
>> to be
>> a problem. Anything less that doesn't belong in the compiler IMHO. If it's 
>> in
>> the compiler, then it's going to be bugging me every time that I compile.
> 
> There are these things called "command line options", maybe you've heard of 
> them?

Maybe you've not heard of what a problem they are in C++? Ever had to 
turn individual warnings on and off just to get some different libraries 
to compile?

The problem is, once you have an "optional warning" in a compiler, they 
are NOT optional. All standard or pseudo-standard libraries MUST comply 
with them.
And if you have an idiotic warning that keeps complaining about 
perfectly valid code (VC++ for example has many such warnings), what 
you've done is reduce the quality of everyone's code everywhere.
IMHO, it's extremely unprofessional for the compiler to cry wolf all the 
time, rather than to clearly identify the symptoms of genuine bugs.