[ctrl_freak]

I actually don't even like -Werror for development. When I'm developing/testing/debugging, I frequently want to run partially implemented functions (a good example of this is repeatedly commenting out blocks of code to bisect a problem). Trying to deal with warnings about unused variables/parameters is extremely cumbersome.

[MaulingMonkey]

I want to opt out of bad warnings-as-errors, rather than failing to opt into good ones. -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -Werror for me - followed by a bunch of -Wno-xyz like -Wno-unused-variable.

You could also use -Wno-error=unused-variable, but I find warnings as warnings almost completely pointless outside of extremely niche circumstances. I will lose them in a sea of other errors when a template goes awry, and after fixing that and building again the warning will disappear because the TU with said warning didn't need rebuilding.

[slavik81]

I agree. The main place I find -Werror to be valuable is on the CI server, where you're checking that committed code compiles cleanly on your target platforms.

[uxp100]

I like having a makefile variable such that you can do "make NO_WERROR=1"