Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

X.Org Server: 1,047 Warnings Reduced To Zero

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Detructor View Post
    First: Respect to Keith for pulling through with fixing those warnings!
    Second: That may reduce the memory footprint of the X server but aside from that, at least for the end user, it won't do much.
    Third: May god (if there is one) have mercy on the poor soul that'll commit the first thing that introduces a warning into the new codebase...because Keith won't have any. (at least I wouldn't after fixing over 1000 warnings)
    I think warnings can also indicate potentially unsafe behavior that is not guaranteed to cause a bug but might under some circumstances.

    Comment


    • #32
      "Fixing" warnings

      by disabling a -W-flag ... I lol'd
      Of the 1047 warnings, 380 of them are generated by this one warning flag. Iíve gone ahead and just disabled it in util/macros for now.

      Comment


      • #33
        Lol, some warning flags are quite useless in fact... i.e. stuff like -Weff-c++ ...

        Comment


        • #34
          Well, warnings is warnings, it's not errors, it just means, that your code is using some obsolete functions, that still works, but might be removed in later compiler versions, or you are using some unsafe things, that works, but shouldnt be used, and so on. And, in open source world, where everything began many years ago with the first versions of compilers, old part of code is almost never rewritten, and it gets more and more warnings with newer compiler versions - there is like 1 out of 100000 packages in linux, that does not give you any warnings, when you try to compile it. i.e., linux kernel gives hundreds of thousands of warnings.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
            I was already aware of this part. I just kind of assume that if someone really needs network transparency, he will avoid this toolkits and use core X11 (or a specialized toolkit, if they exist).
            ViewTouch is such a specialized toolkit.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by startzz View Post
              Well, warnings is warnings, it's not errors, it just means, that your code is using some obsolete functions, that still works, but might be removed in later compiler versions, or you are using some unsafe things, that works, but shouldnt be used, and so on. And, in open source world, where everything began many years ago with the first versions of compilers, old part of code is almost never rewritten, and it gets more and more warnings with newer compiler versions - there is like 1 out of 100000 packages in linux, that does not give you any warnings, when you try to compile it. i.e., linux kernel gives hundreds of thousands of warnings.
              Depends really. Style warnings, obviously, are a PITA if you prefer a different style. Some are quite valid, like the warnings about "if (x=y)", which IS valid C syntax, even if it isn't what you meant when you wrote the line...[I typically have my warning settings elevate that level of warnings to errors, just to make sure I fix it!]

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by fabioamd87 View Post
                why, xorg server has future?
                of course it does. it is used by every linux distribution today. and it will be for years to come. sure there is mir and wayland, but those are not yet ready for prime time, and it will be years before they are as stable and mature as x.org is today.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by dee. View Post
                  But if someone really needs that network transparency, they can just use html5 interfaces in their apps in the first place. Why use core x11, when we already have browser engines that do the job much more efficiently.
                  You should get a job as a stand-up comic. That's the funniest thing I've read on the web today.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by dee. View Post
                    But if someone really needs that network transparency, they can just use html5 interfaces in their apps in the first place. Why use core x11, when we already have browser engines that do the job much more efficiently.
                    browser engines has ridiculous memory usage similar to Java applications

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by JS987 View Post
                      browser engines has ridiculous memory usage similar to Java applications
                      as if memory was so expensive these days ...
                      also the worst part about java are bad programmers, not java itself.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by YoungManKlaus View Post
                        as if memory was so expensive these days ...
                        People keep telling this. It's still wrong. Efficient programming would be better than just adding more and more RAM. There are still prices for memory and sometimes limitations (architecture, embedded systems, older RAM types and so on). Furthermore things tend to crash, become slow and show other signs of nastiness when they get too bulky. Browsers, Java things, GFX programs, whatsnot.
                        I have grown up with DOS, W 3.11 and I (sadly) know what swapping means.

                        > also the worst part about java are bad programmers, not java itself.

                        That is very likely true. But basically everything suffers from bad programming. Even some languages might have suffered from design that wasn't tested thoroughly.
                        Still, in terms of raw performance, Java is a VM and adds (at least) one more layer slowing down things. On the other hand it is comfortable in certain aspects like portability and taking the need of caring much about HW or OS from the coder.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by YoungManKlaus View Post
                          as if memory was so expensive these days ...
                          RAM might be chip, but cache is not, and it is also fixed to a given CPU, you can't just "add more cache". Bad memory usage is bad cache usage, too. The less you are able to leverage your cache, the poorer your performance becomes.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            What does Valgrind think, though?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by YoungManKlaus View Post
                              as if memory was so expensive these days ...
                              also the worst part about java are bad programmers, not java itself.
                              Oh really?
                              Originally posted by http://landley.net/notes.html#09-12-2013
                              My netbook finally needed a reboot today. First time since June. I drove it deep enough into swap that an hour later it still hadn't let me move the mouse pointer. I did this by right click open in background tab on three different links in chrome, and then when it spent five minutes thrashing doing ctrl-alt-F1 to try to get a text console so I could do the "ps ax | grep flash; kill flashpid" dance. Unfortunately, these days that's no longer handled by the kernel but instead handled by X11 going through the whole desktop stack (including the gnome crap that xfce pulls in for no apparent reason), meaning it just added MORE memory pressure, and the poor little netbook with only eight gigabytes of ram went catatonic with swapping.

                              You'd think the out of memory killer would trigger during this, but no, it hadn't run out of SWAP. The auto-partitioning when I installed this thing gave it 4 gigs of swap, it can churn through that for days before deciding it's out of memory and it has to kill process. Freezing and being unresponsive for hours is much better than killing _processes_.

                              I don't think I'm going to miss current Linux userspace when smartphones leave it behind. It used to be happy in 16 megs of ram; that was a huge box. Now it's cramped in 7,714 megs of ram. Progress!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                just wondering if the cleaned up code got merged?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X