3 ms·

So you enabled pedantic warning level, and you got a bunch of pedantic nonsense warnings. There is a reason for these not to be enabled by default. * Unused p

So you enabled pedantic warning level, and you got a bunch of pedantic nonsense warnings. There is a reason for these not to be enabled by default. * Unused parameter -> rly? Who gives a damn? * Use of old style cast -> Well I'm old style, get over it. * No previous prototype declaration -> Again, I do this if I want to. * Shadows field -> who cares? No me. * Cast increases required alignment -> Well, obviously the perf cost is not an issue here. * Etc, etc, etc These are pedantic warnings. However, this is an open source prject and you are free to send me PR's whenever you want.

jguegant 10y ago
"Use of old style cast -> Well I'm old style, get over it." "By using Linux I haven't been limited by the lacking Microsoft C++ compilers only supporting a fraction of the language, but instead been able to use the very latest features and tools."
msim 10y ago
It's funny that you don't mention the warnings that can be security vulnerabilities, like integer precision/signedness. The code screams security vulnerability and I'm not only talking about the warnings.
- vvanders 10y ago
  Yep, I seem to recall there was one in MySQL a while back that just involved a simple int->char conversion where the overflow would trigger a match due to a random seed that was involved in the password path. I'm a big fan of Wall Werror with pragma for specific sections where you must work around the warnings. Does a great job of catching issues with contributions.
clappski 10y ago
Maybe using a `reinterpret_cast` would actually have better performance. A C-style cast tries to do a bunch of casts in order, starting with a static and ending with reinterpret (see http://anteru.net/blog/2007/12/18/200/ http://anteru.net/blog/2007/12/18/200/). There's no excuse for using c-style casting in C++ considering the depth of the different casts we as developers have at our disposal. Additionally, I just looked at the code, and is there any reason it's all stuffed into a single header and source file? I don't know if I'm just being naive, but isn't this a slightly bad design? There seem to be a lot of different data structures that could easily be broken out and make it a bit easier to follow the flow of the project.

jguegant 10y ago

"Use of old style cast -> Well I'm old style, get over it." "By using Linux I haven't been limited by the lacking Microsoft C++ compilers only supporting a fraction of the language, but instead been able to use the very latest features and tools."

msim 10y ago

It's funny that you don't mention the warnings that can be security vulnerabilities, like integer precision/signedness. The code screams security vulnerability and I'm not only talking about the warnings.

vvanders 10y ago
Yep, I seem to recall there was one in MySQL a while back that just involved a simple int->char conversion where the overflow would trigger a match due to a random seed that was involved in the password path. I'm a big fan of Wall Werror with pragma for specific sections where you must work around the warnings. Does a great job of catching issues with contributions.

clappski 10y ago

Maybe using a `reinterpret_cast` would actually have better performance. A C-style cast tries to do a bunch of casts in order, starting with a static and ending with reinterpret (see http://anteru.net/blog/2007/12/18/200/ http://anteru.net/blog/2007/12/18/200/). There's no excuse for using c-style casting in C++ considering the depth of the different casts we as developers have at our disposal. Additionally, I just looked at the code, and is there any reason it's all stuffed into a single header and source file? I don't know if I'm just being naive, but isn't this a slightly bad design? There seem to be a lot of different data structures that could easily be broken out and make it a bit easier to follow the flow of the project.