I'm trying to install HDF5-1.8.16 in my desktop (OS Fedora 23 (64-bit)). I
am using gcc/gfortran/g++ (version 5.3.1-6).
During 'make', it shows so many warnings; please see the attachment. But
'make check', 'make install' and 'make check-install' are all fine.
Please let me know if these warnings during 'make' are at all important, I
mean, if this will produce erroneous result or just ignore them.
What's the point of turning on warnings that you consider generally harmless? Especially when you don't actually fix them. It seems counterproductive, because useful/serious warnings get lost in the noise.
Cheers,
···
On Thu, 5 May 2016 19:17:08 +0000, Dana Robinson said:
Those warnings are generally harmless and you see them because we have
aggressive gcc warnings turned on by default. We are working to reduce
them but it'll probably be a while before they are gone.
--
____________________________________________________________
Sean McBride, B. Eng sean@rogue-research.com
Rogue Research www.rogue-research.com
Mac Software Developer Montréal, Québec, Canada
Those warnings are generally harmless and you see them because we have aggressive gcc warnings turned on by default. We are working to reduce them but it'll probably be a while before they are gone.
Dear All:
I'm trying to install HDF5-1.8.16 in my desktop (OS Fedora 23 (64-bit)). I am using gcc/gfortran/g++ (version 5.3.1-6).
During 'make', it shows so many warnings; please see the attachment. But 'make check', 'make install' and 'make check-install' are all fine.
Please let me know if these warnings during 'make' are at all important, I mean, if this will produce erroneous result or just ignore them.
Thanking you,
Regards,
Arindam
Well, I think its probably fair to say that those warnings are not that useful to HDF5 library *users*. They should probably be turned on *only* for HDF5 developers (or power users).
On Thu, 5 May 2016 19:17:08 +0000, Dana Robinson said:
Those warnings are generally harmless and you see them because we have
aggressive gcc warnings turned on by default. We are working to reduce
them but it'll probably be a while before they are gone.
What's the point of turning on warnings that you consider generally harmless? Especially when you don't actually fix them. It seems counterproductive, because useful/serious warnings get lost in the noise.
Those warnings are generally harmless and you see them because we have
aggressive gcc warnings turned on by default. We are working to reduce them
but it'll probably be a while before they are gone.
I'm trying to install HDF5-1.8.16 in my desktop (OS Fedora 23 (64-bit)). I
am using gcc/gfortran/g++ (version 5.3.1-6).
During 'make', it shows so many warnings; please see the attachment. But
'make check', 'make install' and 'make check-install' are all fine.
Please let me know if these warnings during 'make' are at all important,
I mean, if this will produce erroneous result or just ignore them.
Well, I think its probably fair to say that those warnings are not that useful to HDF5 library *users*. They should probably be turned on *only* for HDF5 developers (or power users).
It's not only library users that are hindered by those warnings, its also developers.
I remember that, when I last hacked inside the HDF5 library, I always had a really hard time
to distinguish between the preexisting warnings and the ones that were triggered by my changes.
I couldn't touch a file without getting a long list of warnings during the next build,
and the relevant ones had the tendency to just slip by in the endless stream.
Also, I'm positive that once you allow a dozen warnings to show up on a normal full build,
the fight against warnings is already lost. Only a normal warning count of *zero* has the necessary
psychological effect to urge people to not trigger new warnings with their changes.
With so many warnings scrolling by during a normal build, you signal to all would-be HDF5 developers
that you really don't care about the warnings, and that it's normal for new code to trigger new warnings.
I don't think that's the signal you want to convey.
So, I think you would do good to just disable the chatty warnings, and concentrate on removing the
remaining ones until you get the warning count back to zero. Then you are back in the ring.
And after that, you can try to switch on and eliminate more chatty warnings one by one.
It will save you a lot of development time.
On Thu, 5 May 2016 19:17:08 +0000, Dana Robinson said:
Those warnings are generally harmless and you see them because we have
aggressive gcc warnings turned on by default. We are working to reduce
them but it'll probably be a while before they are gone.
What's the point of turning on warnings that you consider generally harmless? Especially when you don't actually fix them. It seems counterproductive, because useful/serious warnings get lost in the noise.