Those floats to ints just mean that your number now has no decimals. So float x=1 is the same as int x=1. If it were 1.1, then it would stay float. I would just suggest initializing things as ints if they are not going to involve decimals.

I'm not a brilliant programmer either, but the compiler wouldn't really generate warnings if there was nothing to warn you about. Warnings are often caused when you have a syntactically correct statement that might not do what you expect. For example, you have a couple conversions from float to int in which your numbers lose precision due to forcing a decimal to become an integer. The compiler wants to make sure you know what you are doing because it assumes that if you created a float it was because you needed more precision than an int, but here you are losing that precision. Some warnings, though most likely signs of poor programming, are harmless, but some may really screw up your application.

The best solution would be to re-think your code. Look, for example, at the use of your float. Why are you converting a float to an int? Do you really just need an int? Maybe you should redesign your function to accept floats instead? These are the sorts of things you can think about and very easily use to determine whether you can do away with your warnings. Though not necessary, fixing the warnings can only improve the maintainability and stability of your code.

Always set warnings to maximum possible (/W4 or -pedantic or whichever you prefer). After short while, you'll realize that majority of them are trivial.

But warnings are useful since they often expose underlying problems with design.

When you get type conversion warning, check if the conversion is really needed, or why it occurs. If you find it's necessary, use static_cast<>. When comparing signed/unsigned, it's similar. Why are you mixing those two types? It may expose some other problems which would occur under unusual circumstances.

Quote:Can I get away with disabling the warning output

I'll close my eyes and play in traffic. If I can't see cars, they can't hit me.

Look at it this way - compiler is trying to tell you about possible problems. Why ignore it. You'll be fixing enough bugs already, at least here someone's point out where to prevent them.


Personally, for libraries and unit tests, I run dual compilation. One under MVC with maximum warnings (including those disabled by default) and disabled language extensions, the other under GCC with maximum warnings. On both, I set warnings as errors. This approach obviously doesn't work with code that requires platform specific includes (such as windows.h)

After this passes, I sometimes run static analysis on code. And it's not uncommon to get dozens to hundreds of warnings per compilation unit.

C++ is hell. Use any tool you have to point out possible problems. If anything, compiler's errors are too mild.

Quote:warning C4244: 'return' : conversion from 'const int64_t' to 'int', possible loss of data

This one's could be dangerous, depending on the meaning of that integer. Where do you get a int64_t from, and why do you need to cast it down to an int?

Quote:warning C4244: 'argument' : conversion from 'float' to 'int', possible loss of data

If your intentions are to cast a float to an int (you don't need the decimal part), then just add a static_cast<int>() and the warning will diseappear.

Quote:warning C4800: 'int' : forcing value to bool 'true' or 'false' (performance warning)

That's an easy one, I beleive you are doing something like "bool ok = x;", where "x" is an integer expression. Be explicit and change your code to "bool ok = x != 0;", if that's what you want.

Quote:warning C4018: '<' : signed/unsigned mismatch

I've seen this often when comparing size_t to int. Make sure you're using the appropriate data types. If you don't want to change your data types, use a static_cast<>.

Quote:Original post by Trillian

Quote:warning C4800: 'int' : forcing value to bool 'true' or 'false' (performance warning)

That's an easy one, I beleive you are doing something like "bool ok = x;", where "x" is an integer expression. Be explicit and change your code to "bool ok = x != 0;", if that's what you want.

Missed that one. That's an important one, since it can reveal a typo.



foo should say:

return x==17;