Would you consider cleaning up gcc warnings with -Wextra and -Wpedantic?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- C++
- Stars
- 2.4k
- Forks
- 270
- Avg merge
- 3d 6h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 39
Description
https://github.com/lukester1975/stdexec/tree/gcc-warnings if you would and it's any good...
Happy to fix it up as directed if it's useful. There's only a few in the library itself; mostly in the tests.
Thanks
(gcc manual seems wrong r.e. -Wmissing-field-initializers in c++ code: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39589, hence turning that off)
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the linked gcc-warnings tree and inspect the warnings produced by -Wextra and -Wpedantic in the library and tests. Check the handling of -Wmissing-field-initializers against the cited GCC issue, then verify that the warning cleanup is complete without unrelated changes.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- build-system, testing-qa
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100