"Strong typing vs. strong testing"

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

RG <rNOSPAMon at flownet.com> writes:

> In article <slrnia9dbo.2uqe.usenet-nospam at guild.seebs.net>,
>  Seebs <usenet-nospam at seebs.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2010-09-30, RG <rNOSPAMon at flownet.com> wrote:
>> > You can't have it both ways.  Either I am calling it incorrectly, in 
>> > which case I should get a compiler error,
>> 
>> You get a warning if you ask for it.  If you choose to run without all
>> the type checking on, that's your problem.
>
> My example compiles with no warnings under gcc -Wall.

IIRC, -Wall is not reall ALL.

Try with:  gcc -Wall  -Wextra -Werror 

I would still argue that should be the default, and if really there was
a need, there could be options to disable some warning, or to have some
errors be warnings...

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/