Login
User Name:

Password:



Register
Forgot your password?
Vote for Us!
auth_update crash
Dec 23, 2017, 10:15 pm
By Remcon
check_tumble
Dec 18, 2017, 7:21 pm
By Remcon
parse description bug
Dec 15, 2017, 10:08 pm
By Remcon
Couple bugs
Dec 12, 2017, 5:42 pm
By Remcon
Bug in disarm( )
Nov 12, 2017, 6:54 pm
By GatewaySysop
LoP 1.46
Author: Remcon
Submitted by: Remcon
LOP 1.45
Author: Remcon
Submitted by: Remcon
LOP Heroes Edition
Author: Vladaar
Submitted by: Vladaar
Heroes sound extras
Author: Vladaar
Submitted by: Vladaar
6Dragons 4.3
Author: Vladaar
Submitted by: Vladaar
Users Online
CommonCrawl, Yandex, Yahoo!

Members: 0
Guests: 8
Stats
Files
Topics
Posts
Members
Newest Member
478
3,708
19,242
612
Jacki72H
Today's Birthdays
There are no member birthdays today.
Related Links
» SmaugMuds.org » General » General Discussions » Very interesting wflag stuff
Forum Rules | Mark all | Recent Posts

Very interesting wflag stuff
< Newer Topic :: Older Topic >

Pages:<< prev 1 next >>
Post is unread #1 Mar 31, 2006, 4:45 pm   Last edited Mar 31, 2006, 5:57 pm by Keberus
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Keberus
Conjurer
GroupFUSS Project Team
Posts341
JoinedJun 4, 2005

I decided to add some wflags to my makefile...nothing unusual. I went ahead and checked out AFKMud to see what they were using and used them...compiled fine...again no biggie. I told ya that story to tell you this one...I decided that wflags could really come in handy (if we only knew a bunch and what they did) after a few hours of googling I found some decent links. One of the nicest flags i found out about was the -Wunreachable-code flag. Its definitly worthwhile to at least put in and check out.

BTW: The listing came from: Warning options using GCC

Later,
KeB
       
Post is unread #2 Mar 31, 2006, 7:12 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Samson
Black Hand
GroupAdministrators
Posts3,639
JoinedJan 1, 2002

One small problem with the unreachable code check. It will often trigger on C++ STL based code. Haven't figured out why so we can't make much use of it. Even in C code it's been known to trip a number of false warnings. So while it is useful for finding some things, the spam generated by the false warnings may be enough to cancel it out.
       
Post is unread #3 Apr 1, 2006, 10:40 am
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

GatewaySysop
Conjurer
GroupMembers
Posts367
JoinedMar 7, 2005

Samson said:

One small problem with the unreachable code check. It will often trigger on C++ STL based code. Haven't figured out why so we can't make much use of it. Even in C code it's been known to trip a number of false warnings. So while it is useful for finding some things, the spam generated by the false warnings may be enough to cancel it out.


Hmm. Makes me wonder now. The most recent (which is probably dated by now) I3 client code was something that the unreachable code check got tripped up on. I kind of blew it off at the time, however, and turned the flag off. I don't really use I3 right now anyway so it wasn't a big issue for me. :wink:

       
Post is unread #4 Apr 2, 2006, 11:44 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Samson
Black Hand
GroupAdministrators
Posts3,639
JoinedJan 1, 2002

Heh. I don't think the I3 client code has been run through the grinder in quite some time. I don't doubt that it might have one or two out of the way things that trip over it, but they're probably not unreachable.
       
Post is unread #5 Apr 3, 2006, 9:01 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

GatewaySysop
Conjurer
GroupMembers
Posts367
JoinedMar 7, 2005

Samson said:

Heh. I don't think the I3 client code has been run through the grinder in quite some time. I don't doubt that it might have one or two out of the way things that trip over it, but they're probably not unreachable.


I figured as much. If the flag isn't that reliable, I won't bother with it anyway. :biggrin:
       
Post is unread #6 Apr 3, 2006, 11:35 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Lately, I'd be happier to see I3 get more reliable servers/routers than anything else.. or perhaps if Tim would bring his headlines bot to imc then I wouldn't need i3 at all anymore...
       
Post is unread #7 Apr 4, 2006, 2:04 am
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Samson
Black Hand
GroupAdministrators
Posts3,639
JoinedJan 1, 2002

Heh, well, someone did ask me about getting the I3 router code posted somewhere to be downloaded. I'll have to try and remember to do that if I can come home from graveyard shift sane enough. The reliability of the I3 network combined with the hostile attitude of its general membership shoujld have killed it off long ago, but some things just refuse to die. In the absence of this, there is always less unstable router code to play with.
       
Post is unread #8 Apr 5, 2006, 12:57 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

I still say I'd be perfectly willing to drop the I3 network altogether if we could convince Tim@TimMUD to bring his TimBot to IMC so we could have a headlines channel on IMC.. it's about the only thing I have any real interest in on I3 these days. My own experience there is that the only active channels on I3 anymore are the Discworld channels (pretty boring unless you're playing on a Discworld mud), the coffemud related channels (I use smaug, why do I care about coffeemud channels?), the headlines channel (very amusing and entertaining, but hardly worth a whole network), and the igossip type channels (moderated(?) and utterly OOC/mundane at best).. I'd be happy to leave all that behind as a quickly forgotten evil memory if I could get TimBot's announcements on IMC instead or even just in addition. *sigh*

I suppose failing the ability to replicate his news bot or convince him to have it spam an IMC channel instead/in addition to it's I3 channel, a better, more reliable, router for I3 would be sufficient.
       
Post is unread #9 Apr 9, 2006, 7:34 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Samson
Black Hand
GroupAdministrators
Posts3,639
JoinedJan 1, 2002

Or if it's that huge a deal, bridging the channel it's broadcast on would work, so long as it's not the main chat channel.
       
Post is unread #10 Apr 9, 2006, 10:12 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Oh, that might work, it is just a single channel that's only used by tim's bot to broadcast news headlines and the occasional wiseguy response from the peanut gallery.
       
Pages:<< prev 1 next >>