Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] automatically ban strcpy()

> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 5:26 AM Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> >   1. We'll only trigger with -Wimplicit-function-declaration
> >      (and only stop compilation with -Werror). These are
> >      generally enabled by DEVELOPER=1. If you _don't_ have
> >      that set, we'll still catch the problem, but only at
> >      link-time, with a slightly less useful message:
> >
> >      If instead we convert this to a reference to an
> >      undefined variable, that always dies immediately. But
> >      gcc seems to print the set of errors twice, which
> >      clutters things up.
> 
> The above does a pretty good job of convincing me that this ought to
> be implemented via an undefined variable rather than undefined
> function, exactly because it is the newcomer or casual contributor who
> is most likely to trip over a banned function, and almost certainly
> won't have DEVELOPER=1 set. The gcc clutter seems a minor point
> against the benefit this provides to that audience.