From: Francesc A. <fa...@ca...> - 2006-12-21 11:33:31
|
A Dijous 21 Desembre 2006 11:30, Norbet Namec escrigu=C3=A9: > Maybe, the attached patch is a good intermediate solution? It suppresses > only those warnings selectively that are caused by PyX abundantly and can > safely be ignored. Norbert, it is called Pyrex, not PyX ;) And yes, your new workaround is better, but I won't apply it because a couple of reasons: =2D It's gcc dependent. =2D It continues to hide potentially informative warnings. The definitive solution is to fix Pyrex so that it wouldn't raise warnings. I know that there are already people working on this, and hopefully, we would get rid of them eventually. > I think the 'eflags' option is nice to have but does not really address t= he > problem. It is like selling a dirty car and give the customer directions = to > the next car-wash... :-) Maybe, but that's pretty much like life itself: it's not always as clean as we would like to ;) Cheers, =46rancesc |