Re: PATCH: Find more ObjC methods

[Ziemowit Laski]

On Tuesday, Oct 7, 2003, at 10:27 US/Pacific, Alexander Malmberg wrote:

> Devang Patel wrote:
> > On Oct 7, 2003, at 3:08 AM, David Ayers wrote:
> > > So even if this isn't reverted (and I do conceed to the new behavior
> > > in the sense that it is /using/ the prototype), I hope a patch that
> > > will introduce an optional warning with a more accurate warning would
> > > be acceptable.
> [snip]
> > Now, with this background lets discussion current issue.
> > Before Zem's recent patch, GCC had bug in the sense it used to
> > warn 'foo may not respond to bar'
>
> The wording was misleading, and could be considered a bug. However, the
> presence of a warning was no bug.

No, it was not misleading; it was unambiguously, 100% wrong.  Seeing
an actual @implementation gives you a guarantee that no mere @interface
can ever give you.
> > in situations where, it can
> > determine that foo responds to bar. So now GCC does not
> > issue warnings in such cases. And we are discussing in this
> > thread whether we should add new command line option to
> > enable 'wrong' compiler warnings.
>
> The warning isn't wrong unless you don't want to follow this convention
> (methods declared only in an @implementation are private to that
> @implementation).

No, it's _still_ wrong :-)  And, for the n-th time, allow me to 
reiterate the
fact that Objective-C has _no_ private methods (because your precious 
"private"
method _will_ get called by the runtime).
> As David Ayers and I have explained, we find this convention, and the
> support from the compiler in adhering to it, useful. If you don't,
> you're free to not enable/disable the warning (note "optional").
>
> > I do not approve such patch.
>
> Why? The warning would be optional, so doing this gains you nothing, it
> merely prevents those who do want the warning from getting it. It seems
> that you want to remove a feature that others use just because you 
> don't
> use it, which is not a particularly nice attitude.

As I said before, you're more than welcome to offer a patch that will
give you the warning you want.  But the warning you used to get until
recently was outright wrong.

--Zem
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ziemowit Laski                 1 Infinite Loop, MS 301-2K
Mac OS X Compiler Group        Cupertino, CA USA  95014-2083
Apple Computer, Inc.           +1.408.974.6229  Fax .5477