This is an attempt to demonstrate what is necessary to get -Wshadow building under -Werror on clang, and to see what other existing pull requests that might conflict with.
This was prompted by an example of shadowing I spotted in review. We currently warn against shadowing in the docs but do not detect it, so instead rely on review to identify these issues.
Note:
- This was previously enabled in 2016 and reverted six months later.
- I proposed a version in 2019 using a different approach in a different context.
The question is: have the circumstances changed in the past 9 years? Is a partial fix beneficial?
One option would be to merge the low-risk changes, re. tests, etc. and exclude sensitive files from this warning to get it applied to regular builds.
Related:
<!-- *** Please remove the following help text before submitting: *** Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed immediately. GUI-related pull requests should be opened against https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui first. See CONTRIBUTING.md -->
<!-- Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience significantly: * Any test improvements or new tests that improve coverage are always welcome. * All other changes should have accompanying unit tests (see `src/test/`) or functional tests (see `test/`). Contributors should note which tests cover modified code. If no tests exist for a region of modified code, new tests should accompany the change. * Bug fixes are most welcome when they come with steps to reproduce or an explanation of the potential issue as well as reasoning for the way the bug was fixed. * Features are welcome, but might be rejected due to design or scope issues. If a feature is based on a lot of dependencies, contributors should first consider building the system outside of Bitcoin Core, if possible. * Refactoring changes are only accepted if they are required for a feature or bug fix or otherwise improve developer experience significantly. For example, most "code style" refactoring changes require a thorough explanation why they are useful, what downsides they have and why they *significantly* improve developer experience or avoid serious programming bugs. Note that code style is often a subjective matter. Unless they are explicitly mentioned to be preferred in the [developer notes](/doc/developer-notes.md), stylistic code changes are usually rejected. -->
<!-- Bitcoin Core has a thorough review process and even the most trivial change needs to pass a lot of eyes and requires non-zero or even substantial time effort to review. There is a huge lack of active reviewers on the project, so patches often sit for a long time. -->