>>It's a fine point, but I think it is more than just a platform/compiler
>>quirk
>
>Well, most compilers have this, but then they have it as an *option*, they
>don't force these warnings!

    One man's bug is another man's feature.  As I recall your objection -
    "Just because MS VC complains, doesn't mean we should fix it"
    If you're not using MS VC, why complain about the behavior of it?

    I think it is appropriate to be explicit about floating point
    truncation in the context of numerically sensitive code.
    To me, an explicit cast indicates a "Yes I'm sure I want
    to do this", to you it's a nuisance.  I've found that paranoid
    warnings actually help avoid problems later on - why do
    you insist that making use of this information is
    "non-standard" or that the compiler is "buggy" for doing
    so?

    I am not advocating "automatic explicit casting" as your
    example may suggest.  I like to see code compiling clean
    on different platforms.  I don't mind having to dot my
    i's and crossing my t's to appease each different compiler,
    it actually reveals something about the maturity and
    philosophy of the compiler.

    It sounds like we're both arguing from experience,
    from different perspectives.  You're pointing to
    the standard treatment of floats and doubles in
    the context of implicit casting.  I'm pointing to the
    (pragmatic) benefit of identifying bugs early.
    We like to make different trade-offs.

    And uh, I think we both need to keep in mind that this
    argument is pretty academic.  It doesn't bother me
    greatly enough to upset a fellow povray developer,
    or get them offside.  So, if you're feeling that I'm a total
    heretic for not agreeing with you, let me know and
    I'll argue less strongly.. :-)  I 99% agree with everything
    you say anyway!

Post a reply to this message