-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 270
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix some warnings in developer builds #3247
Merged
derobins
merged 2 commits into
HDFGroup:develop
from
jhendersonHDF:developer_warning_fix
Jul 18, 2023
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The changes in this file fix Wjump-misses-init warnings by moving the initialization and termination sections into a new scope block. The malloc attribute also gets added to H5allocate_memory |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not just take it out of the gnu/developer-general file?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It still seems like a good warning to have for -O1, -O2, -O3 builds where HDF5_ENABLE_DEV_WARNINGS is on. It might still be able to inform about why a function wasn't inlined and then someone can go inspect. Developer builds have HDF5_ENABLE_DEV_WARNINGS on by default, but if someone is building in RelWithDebInfo or similar with HDF5_ENABLE_DEV_WARNINGS on, then it makes sense to have -Winline there. It's just currently not compatible with what we probably think of as developer builds (developer or debug builds) since we add -Og in both cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Secondly, it should probably be in the elseif block of line 187, which is where it would get added. Maybe take it out the developer-general file and only add it back in if supported? All in that elseif block.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Moving into the elseif makes sense. As for taking the flag out and re-adding it later - that sort of seems to me like it defeats the purpose of having the warning flag files in the first place.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It depends on whether it is a usually used or a usually removed choice. Which one is more common?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I suppose that depends on how many people usually turn on HDF5_ENABLE_DEV_WARNINGS