一些警告可能意味着代码中可能出现语义错误或可能出现UB。例如;if()之后，一个未使用的变量，一个被局部变量掩盖的全局变量，或者有符号和无符号的比较。许多警告与编译器中的静态代码分析器或在编译时检测到的违反ISO标准有关，这“需要诊断”。虽然在特定情况下，这些事件可能是合法的，但大多数情况下，它们是设计问题的结果。

一些编译器，例如GCC，有一个命令行选项来激活“警告为错误”模式。这是一个很好的工具，如果残酷，教育新手。

警告是等待发生的错误。 因此，您必须启用编译器警告，并整理代码以删除任何警告。

众所周知，就hll而言，C是一种相当低级的语言。虽然c++看起来是一种比C高级得多的语言，但它仍然具有C的一些特征。其中一个特点就是这些语言是由程序员设计的，为程序员设计的——特别是那些知道自己在做什么的程序员。

(对于这个答案的其余部分，我将专注于C。我要说的大部分内容也适用于c++，尽管可能没有那么强烈。尽管Bjarne Stroustrup有一句名言:“C很容易搬起石头砸自己的脚;c++让它变得更难，但当你这样做的时候，它会把你的整条腿都炸掉。”)

如果你知道你在做什么——真的知道你在做什么——有时候你可能不得不“打破规则”。但大多数时候，我们大多数人都会同意，善意的规则让我们所有人都远离麻烦，一直肆意违反这些规则是一个坏主意。

But in C and C++, there are surprisingly large numbers of things you can do that are "bad ideas", but which aren't formally "against the rules". Sometimes they're a bad idea some of the time (but might be defensible other times); sometimes they're a bad idea virtually all of the time. But the tradition has always been not to warn about these things — because, again, the assumption is that programmers know what they are doing, they wouldn't be doing these things without a good reason, and they'd be annoyed by a bunch of unnecessary warnings.

当然，并不是所有的程序员都知道自己在做什么。特别是，每个C程序员(无论多么有经验)都要经历一个开始C程序员的阶段。即使是有经验的C程序员也会粗心大意，犯错误。

最后，经验表明，程序员不仅会犯错误，而且这些错误会产生真正的、严重的后果。如果你犯了一个错误，编译器没有警告你，而且程序没有立即崩溃，或者因为它而做一些明显的错误，这个错误可能潜伏在那里，隐藏，有时长达数年，直到它造成一个真正的大问题。

So it turns out that, most of the time, warnings are a good idea, after all. Even the experienced programmers have learned that (actually, it's "especially the experienced programmers have learned that"), on balance, the warnings tend to do more good than harm. For every time you did something wrong deliberately and the warning was a nuisance, there are probably at least ten times you did something wrong by accident and the warning saved you from further trouble. And most warnings can be disabled or worked around for those few times when you really want to do the "wrong" thing.

(这类“错误”的一个经典例子是if(A = b)的测试。大多数时候，这确实是一个错误，所以现在大多数编译器都会对此发出警告——有些甚至是默认的。但是如果你真的想把b赋值给a并测试结果，你可以通过输入if((a = b))来禁用警告。

The second question is, why would you want to ask the compiler to treat warnings as errors? I'd say it's because of human nature, specifically, the all-too-easy reaction of saying "Oh, that's just a warning, that's not so important, I'll clean that up later." But if you're a procrastinator (and I don't know about you, but I'm a world-class procrastinator) it's easy to put off the necessary cleanup for basically ever — and if you get into the habit of ignoring warnings, it gets easier and easier to miss an important warning message that's sitting there, unnoticed, in the midst of all the ones you're relentlessly ignoring.

因此，要求编译器将警告视为错误是你可以对自己玩的一个小技巧，以避免这个人类的弱点，迫使自己立即修复警告，否则你的程序将无法编译。

Personally, I'm not as insistent about treating warnings as errors — in fact, if I'm honest, I can say that I don't tend to enable that option in my "personal" programming. But you can be sure I've got that option enabled at work, where our style guide (which I wrote) mandates its use. And I would say — I suspect most professional programmers would say — that any shop that doesn't treat warnings as errors in C is behaving irresponsibly, is not adhering to commonly-accepted industry best practices.

将警告视为错误只是自律的一种方式:您正在编译一个程序来测试那个闪亮的新功能，但是在您修复那些草率的部分之前，您无法测试。werror提供了其他信息。它只是非常明确地设定了优先级:

在修复现有代码中的问题之前，不要添加新代码

重要的是心态，而不是工具。编译器诊断输出是一种工具。MISRA C(嵌入式C)是另一个工具。使用哪一种并不重要，但可以说编译器警告是最简单的工具(只需设置一个标志)，而且信噪比非常高。所以没有理由不使用它。

No tool is infallible. If you write const float pi = 3.14;, most tools won't tell you that you defined π with a bad precision which may lead to problems down the road. Most tools won't raise an eyebrow on if(tmp < 42), even if it's commonly known that giving variables meaningless names and using magic numbers is a way to disaster in big projects. You have to understand that any "quick test" code you write is just that: a test, and you have to get it right before you move on to other tasks, while you still see its shortcomings. If you leave that code as is, debugging it after you spend two months adding new features will be significantly harder.

一旦你进入了正确的心态，使用-Werror就没有意义了。将警告作为警告将允许您做出明智的决定，是否仍然有意义运行您即将开始的调试会话，还是中止它并首先修复警告。

警告包含了一些最熟练的c++开发人员可以放入应用程序中的最佳建议。他们值得留在身边。

C++, being a Turing complete language, has plenty of cases where the compiler must simply trust that you knew what you are doing. However, there are many cases where the compiler can realize that you probably did not intend to write what you wrote. A classic example is printf() codes which don't match the arguments, or std::strings passed to printf (not that that ever happens to me!). In these cases, the code you wrote is not an error. It is a valid C++ expression with a valid interpretation for the compiler to act on. But the compiler has a strong hunch that you simply overlooked something which is easy for a modern compiler to detect. These are warnings. They are things that are obvious to a compiler, using all the strict rules of C++ at its disposal, that you might have overlooked.

关闭或忽略警告，就像选择忽略那些比你更有经验的人的免费建议。这是一个傲慢的教训，当你飞得离太阳太近，翅膀融化了，或者发生记忆损坏错误时，这个教训就结束了。在这两者之间，我愿意随时从天上掉下来!

“将警告视为错误”是这一哲学的极端版本。这里的想法是解决编译器给您的每个警告——您听取每个免费建议并执行它。这对你来说是否是一个好的开发模式取决于你的团队以及你所开发的产品类型。这是僧侣可能有的苦行方式。对一些人来说，效果很好。对另一些人来说，则不然。

在我的许多应用程序中，我们不将警告视为错误。我们这样做是因为这些特定的应用程序需要在多个平台上编译，使用多个不同年代的编译器。有时我们会发现，如果在一个平台上修复一个警告，而不将其转化为另一个平台上的警告，实际上是不可能的。所以我们只是小心行事。我们尊重警告，但我们不会为它们竭尽全力。

忽略警告意味着您留下了草率的代码，这不仅会在将来给其他人带来问题，而且还会使您不太注意到重要的编译消息。

编译器输出越多，就越不会有人注意到。越干净越好。这也意味着你知道自己在做什么。警告是非常不专业、粗心和危险的。