Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Why should it? I just don’t get the obsession. As long as no one commits any warnings (and it’s easy to have a no warning policy), then I don’t see why it should be enabled. Sometimes I just quickly wanna throw in an unsafe printf here and there, or not change a type in every place when iterating and trying changes. It’s just strange to disallow yourself to try quick changes that warns because they might be unwanted in certain situations.

And don’t worry, if the new idea I’m trying is worth it, I will fix it up so it doesn’t have any warnings. And I saved a lot of time by not fixing all these warnings on the previous 2 ideas I tried.




Because painful experience has shown us time and time again that if a developer doesn't have it on all the time they will not let issues creep in. In theory you can use a CI system which does have it on, but those are not universal.


Or... you can just fix the warnings before commiting. We have no tolerance for warnings on pushed code, and this has seriously never been a problem.

It’s just annoying to have to remove every unused variable/parameter when trying changes out.




Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: