In article <Xns### [at] 204213191226> , Philippe Lhoste 
<Phi### [at] GMXnet>  wrote:

> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in news:3d9a4b7e@news.povray.org:
>
>>   I also disagree with the idea that a compiler should not issue any
>> warnings about code which is correct according to the C++ syntax
>> definition. The fact that a piece of code is syntactically correct does
>> not mean that it works ok. That's exactly what warnings are for: To
>> inform you that the piece of code you just wrote might not work as you
>> want. The warning might be irrelevant in some cases, but it still can be
>> of great aid in many cases.
>
> I agree.

Well, Warp intentionally misrepresented what I said in order to argue about
something else just for the sake of argument.  I never disagreed on the
point he makes, in fact I made very clear:

In article <3d8ed609$1@news.povray.org> , "Thorsten Froehlich"
<tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> Of course, setting the maximum warning level changes this rule (it should
> then warn about everything it can detect), but such a thing does not belong
> into the default warning set, but the all warning set (gcc and VC warn by
> default about this incorrectly).


    Thorsten


____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message