[Info-vax] [OT?] Should compiler warnings be treated as errors ?

[Simon Clubley]

On 2021-09-10, hb <end.of at inter.net> wrote:
> On 9/10/21 7:41 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2021-09-10, Craig A. Berry <craigberry at nospam.mac.com> wrote:
>>> On 9/10/21 9:32 AM, hb wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Do you ask for a linker switch (or by default?) to disable image
>>>> production in case of a warning?
>>>
>>> No. I didn't know there was such a switch.
>>>
>> 
>> I've just had a look in the online help and I can't find it either.
>> 
>> It could be useful so I would be interested in knowing what that
>> qualifier is. (I am assuming that it would cause LINK to exit with
>> an error-level status that could be detected within a build procedure.)
>> 
>
> Maybe I didn't make it clear. It would have been better if I had asked,
> do you want/need such a qualifier? If implemented, the DCL status code
> will/should be an error code, something like ERRORISUE, "completed with
> errors".

I see. Yes, that would be something very useful to have, but it must
_not_ complete, in the form of actually generating an executable (even
with an error status), as that would defeat much of the benefit.

The reason for that is that it would satisfy the current dependency for
whatever make tool you are using, so make would move onto the next
target instead of retrying the failed target when you ran make again.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.