Is it time to --enable-warnings?

[Hal Murray]

Richard Laager said:
> I don't think -Werror should be the default. That can break things that
> are perfectly fine, especially if someone is trying to build an existing
> release on a newer compiler that added a new warning.

> If you made -Werror the default in release builds, please revert that
> immediately. 


Fred Wright said:
> Warnings are for developers, not end users.  Inflicting broken builds on
> end users is far more likely to piss people off than to get useful
> feedback. 

Thanks.  Fixed.

Is it interesting that nobody else said anything?

Is there some well known war story that I've missed?

When I first saw Richard's message, I said to myself
  "That's interesting.  How should I decide?"

  What are the chances that a new compiler will have a new warning?
  What are the chances that a new warning will find a problem?
  What are the chances that it will be a real bug?
  What are the chances that a bug will be a security problem?

  What are the costs of annoying a sysadmin?
  What are the costs of having a security bug?


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.