[GRASS5] Summary of significant compiler warnings

[Glynn Clements]

Michael Rensing wrote:

> So is a warning like:
> popen.c: In function ‘G_popen’:
> popen.c:64: warning: missing sentinel in function call
> 
> not significant? Sorry, I'm not a c programmer, so I don't know what to 
> report and what to ignore.

I had to look this one up on google. It appears to be new in gcc 4.x,
which explains why I've never seen it.

Basically, it's warning that the last argument should be a null
pointer, when it's actually the integer 0. 

That particular case is significant; it could cause problems on 64-bit
platforms, where a pointer is larger than an int.

Warnings which are generated even when no -W switches are used are
significant, as they usually indicate implementation-dependent
behaviour.

-- 
Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>