[hermitdev]

> And I'd rather keep the library warning free instead of telling the users to switch warnings off.

Thank you! Separately, but related: fuck you, Google! (every time I have to deal with protobuf in C++, I curse Google and their "we don't give a shit about signed vs unsigned comparisons").

[anyfoo]

And I don't think there's an excuse not to. I work on giant projects with tons of people, that still manage to use -Werror.

Yeah, some warnings are turned off, but not as many as you'd think, and usually for good reasons, which also includes deliberate design decisions. For example, we don't care about pre-C11 compatibility (because we won't build for pre-C11), so that warning is off. We also like 0-sized arrays, so that warning is off as well.

It's a moving target, because compiler engineers add new warnings over time. Adapting the new compiler means taking care of the new warnings. There's almost always a way to do so instead of turning a new warning off.

[immibis]

The person who writes the library isn't using the same compiler as you.

[fluoridation]

I just turn warnings off for protobuf stuff. In general I do that for any code I don't own but have to compile.

[jcelerier]

3rdparty libs should be treated as -isystem. Otherwise you're just needlessly paying for other's mistakes.

[hermitdev]

The problem is: it's infectious into the generated code, as well. Is that 3rd party or not? Yes, it was generated by a 3rd party tool, but from, ostensibly, _your_ protobuf file.

edit to add: and yes `-isystem` is absolutely a useful tool. If memory serves, though, it doesn't protect from macro or template expansions, though.