David Brown <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> ... but be a bit wary of any warning option which isn't included in >> -Wall or -Wextra -- they're usually omitted for a reason (typically >> because they yield tons of false positives on reasonable code). > > That depends on your definition of "reasonable code" ! Of course. :) In general, though, there is some thought behind what's included in -Wall/-Extra. Stuff that's omitted tends to be where the warnings are domain-specific, reflect programming practices which aren't widespread enough, or where the gcc implementation is simply lacking in some obvious way (sometimes it's very tricky to get the heuristics right). -Wpadded, for instance, may be very interesting for embedded devs, but probably not so much for many others, and yields vast quantities of warnings on "ordinary" code. -Wfloat-equal, on the other hand, reflects a rule of thumb which is very useful when applied intelligently (i.e., by a human), but is less well suited to automatic application. [Testing for floating-point equality is unreliable if the values being tested are the result of calculation, but _is_ reliable if the values are the result of simple assignment, especially certain values like 0.0 -- and the compiler is very unlikely to be able to distinguish these cases. If you _know_ that your code-base never, ever, tests equality in the latter case, you can safely use -Wfloat-equal, but this isn't something that can be relied upon.] <etc etc blah blah> -miles -- values of β will give rise to dom!
