questions from using lint

[Root Boy Jim]

> In article <942 at umd5.UUCP> zben at umd5.UUCP (Ben Cranston) writes:
> >In article <219 at aplvax.UUCP> ded at aplvax.UUCP (Don E. Davis) writes:
> >
> >>In article <*> Root Boy Jim writes:
> >>>You people fail to realize that some of us out here don't like lint.
> >>>It complains too much about what I do. ... 
> >
> >>I know several excellent programmers who never use lint.  ...
> >
> >Hmm, I remember a certain Cobol compiler that had an 'E' option to generate
> >error messages - because it generated such a quantity of informational
> >diagnostics but its users wanted "clean compiles".  I can see Cobol types
> >complaining about this, but US?
> >
> 
> The whole lint/cc issue is probably one of those little misfeatures of unix
> that we just have to live with.  Sure there are historical reasons, and nice
> efficiency arguments for keeping the two separate, but if lint was a default
> pass of the compiler that could be disabled, or diminished by a switch, then
> there would be a whole lot more people using lint, and generating more
> portable code than otherwise.
> 
> One of the more traumatic things about being exposed to unix after working
> with numerous other systems was that the stupid c compiler refused to give me
> a nice clean listing with source, interspersed error messages, and optional
> object code.  I'm not dumb, but trying to learn a debug a big program though
> a 24-line window and my memory just doesn't make it...
> 
> -- 
> George Robbins - now working with,	uucp: {ihnp4|seismo|caip}!cbmvax!grr
> but no way officially representing	arpa: cbmvax!grr at seismo.css.GOV
> Commodore, Engineering Department	fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)
 
BSD has a program called `error' that will insert the errors & then invoke
`vi' on all the sources. EMACS will do that as well.

	(Root Boy) Jim Cottrell		<rbj at cmr>
	"One man gathers what another man spills"