Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:24910 comp.lang.c++:6026
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!pyrdc!netxcom!netxdev!ewiles
From: ewiles@netxdev.DHL.COM (Edwin Wiles)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: machine generated code and chatty compilers
Keywords: machine generated C code
Message-ID: <2540@netxcom.DHL.COM>
Date: 5 Jan 90 21:34:21 GMT
References: <1471@mdbs.UUCP>
Sender: news@netxcom.DHL.COM
Reply-To: ewiles@netxdev.UUCP (Edwin Wiles)
Followup-To: comp.lang.c
Organization: NetExpress Communications, Inc.
Lines: 25

In article <1471@mdbs.UUCP> wsmith@mdbs.UUCP (Bill Smith) writes:
>For those helpful souls that wish their C or C++ compiler to generate
>helpful warning messages in contexts that are technically correct, I 
>have another argument that that is inherently a bad idea.
>....{edited for brevity}....
>If it is convenient for the pre-processor to generate code that is in a
>pattern that is a mistake when done by humans, any warnings in such
>context will render the rest of the compiler's error checking useless.

1)	If it's a mistake for a human to do it, then it's a mistake for a
	program to do it.

2)	If it's not a mistake, then don't complain about it.

	(Personally, I consider type-mismatches to be mistakes.  Supposedly
	"safe" mismatches have bitten me too often for me to 'ignore' them
	without careful consideration, and even then I'll typecast rather
	than leave a "mistake".)

3)	Any program smart enough to write code should be smart enough to
	avoid things such as type mismatches.  If it isn't, then fix it!
	"Who?... Me?... WHAT opinions?!?"	| Edwin Wiles
    Schedule: (n.) An ever changing nightmare.	| NetExpress, Inc.
  ...!{hadron,sundc,pyrdc,uunet}!netxcom!ewiles	| 1953 Gallows Rd. Suite 300
       ewiles@iad-nxe.global-mis.DHL.COM	| Vienna, VA 22182