Re: Compiling 1.7.0 with gcc-3.3

[Rob Browning]

Mikael Djurfeldt <address@hidden> writes:

> Of course, I'd like this to work with the default
> --enable-error-on-warning.  However, there are two problematic
> instances.  One is the use of SCM_STACKITEM.  For example:
>
> eval.c:1965:
>   if (scm_stack_checking_enabled_p
>       && SCM_STACK_OVERFLOW_P ((SCM_STACKITEM *) &proc))

Right I posted this to guile-devel a week or so ago.  Someone posted a
(void *) coercion fix, but I haven't had a chance to look in to it.

> This could be "solved" by adding -Wno-strict-aliasing to the
> compilation options, but that might remove better motivated warnings.

I'd be happier with -fno-strict-aliasing, but I don't really want that
either.  I'd rather see if we can alter the code to avoid the warning.

> I think this is a stupid warning message.  In any case, you'd want to
> be able to shut it off.  I can't find any way to do that.  Maybe we
> should talk to the gcc people about this?
>
> I've tried to enclose the code causing the warning with a surrounding
> conditional which tests the sizes of the data types, but the compiler
> outputs the above warning even though the code isn't going to be
> compiled.

We've worked around a bunch of warnings of this type before (I think
Marius fixed most of them), so hopefully we can just adjust the code
to avoid these too.

> I think it's important to resolve this in some way.  If we can't, I'm
> going to suggest that we shut off error-on-warning as a default, which
> would be sad.  But Guile should compile "out-of-the-box".

I'd be strongly opposed to turning off -Werror.  I'd like to consider
that a last resort.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592  F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4