RE: Windows Build: feature branch, src/exithandle.c,

[Conrad T. Pino]

Hi Larry,

> From: Larry Jones [mailto:lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com]
> 
> Within reason.  We don't want to obfuscate the code just to shut up an
> overly-paranoid compiler.

Agreed, let's avoid obfuscations.

> And for compilers that have multiple levels
> of paranoia, we're mostly concerned with warnings that occur at the
> default level, not warnings that only occur at higher levels.  I've
> looked (briefly) at the warnings you're getting on Windows and in my
> opinion most of them are not worth fixing.  If I'm interpreting the
> options correctly, we're compiling with warning level 3 -- isn't 2 the
> default?

Yes, it looks level 3 to me.  I don't know the default.

> If so, we should probably change it so that people aren't
> unduly concerned.

I don't know enough about CVS to have a meaningful opinion on where
the warning level should be for CVS.

> There are likewise some warnings that occur when
> using gcc -Wall that aren't worth fixing, but only developers are
> expected to use gcc -Wall (and even they don't always!).

And most of the warnings occur in imported code.

> -Larry Jones

Conrad