-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 441
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Define conversions explicitly, and use more rigorous flags in the CI #703
Define conversions explicitly, and use more rigorous flags in the CI #703
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like these explicit casts, this makes the code cleaner in my opinion.
The compiler will do the correct cast in most (all) cases. The point is separate compiler warnings that can really help identify a bug from the type casts that make sense. After those changes, it is easier to use |
Sorry for the work I caused with my suggestion 😄 I also think the explicit conversions are a good improvement. I am not quite clear on how these changes relate to LTO though, to me it seems like it does not really belong to this commit? I'm not sure how much value there is in enabling LTO in the CI without The additional errors from Personally I am also a bit cautious with the general |
No problem at all. This is time we spend now to avoid problems in future.
When you do not use
Great! Can I merge your commit and add it to this branch? Or maybe you want to propose a PR. Thanks. No, I have just tracked the issues related to
Yeah... |
0ac7962
to
e279706
Compare
Sure, here is the PR: #706 The CBLAS (and probably also LAPACKE) stuff will need more work I'm afraid. On a first glance it seems like the recent |
e279706
to
e203d67
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #703 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 0.00% 0.00%
=======================================
Files 1894 1894
Lines 184078 184078
=======================================
Misses 184078 184078
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
Notes:Commit e203d67 has:
|
e203d67
to
06e7c80
Compare
…version to the CI
06e7c80
to
fdcd1de
Compare
Last commits:
|
PR #702 fixed a problem that could be avoided by using more strict flags in the CI. This PR:
I still couldn't use
-Werror=lto-type-mismatch
, as suggested in #702 (comment), because the tests still have type mismatch and/or implicit type casts.