liberty-eiffel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Liberty-eiffel] Inline agent


From: Raphael Mack
Subject: Re: [Liberty-eiffel] Inline agent
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2016 11:05:46 +0100

Mh. I am not sur for this one. Do you have concrete example in the IUP wrapper you ca Show us? Maybe we ca suggest some change to solve the root cause of the warnings...

Rapha


-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
Von: Germán Arias <address@hidden>
Datum: 21.02.2016 02:58 (GMT+01:00)
An: Raphael Mack <address@hidden>
Cc: address@hidden
Betreff: Re: [Liberty-eiffel] Inline agent

El sáb, 20-02-2016 a las 23:39 +0100, Raphael Mack escribió:
> Hi,
>
> I think the compiler is right. It is better to have the open arguments
> explicit and it would be good to change your code.
>
> Nevertheless this makes me think of warning levels. Currently we have
> two types of warnings: style and ordinary and we have no fine grained
> way to suppress warnings. Maybe it would be good to give each warning an
> ID, which can be suppressed in liberty.se or even in a comment of the
> related lines "-- LEWC:ID:<justification>" or something similar.
>
> I strongly believe that our warnings are worth fixing, so I will
> probably not use such a feature and I would object to have no warnings
> in our libs, but some users might like such things.
>
> In the short we could make the "missing open argument warning" a style
> warning.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Cheers,
> Rapha
>

Also would be nice have an option to suppress warnings when some feature
changes their export status. For example from {any} to {}. It's a bit
annoying to see this amount of warnings when I compile some example
using eiffel-iup.

Germán



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]