Re: [C++ patch] accept __null as sentinel

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>
>
> > The documentation for -pedantic says:
> >
> > "Issue all the warnings demanded by strict ISO C and ISO C++; reject all
> > programs that use forbidden extensions, and some other programs that do not
> > follow ISO C and ISO C++."
>
>
> Yes, -pedantic does fit.

I'm not sure what you're suggesting; that the current documentation 
would suggest that adding this warning to -pedantic makes sense, or that 
the documentation should be changed to cover some broader class of 
warnings?  I don't think I'd agree with either opinion.

Anyhow, I'm not sure that we're achieving marginal benefit corresponding 
to the marginal cost of this conversation.  I think we're in agreement 
that (a) the warning is useful in some circumstances, and (b) -Wall 
isn't the place for it.  Where exactly it moves to seems less important 
to me.

The most practical approach to solving your problem would seem to me to 
post a patch that adds a new -W flag for this warning (and moves the 
code to c-common.c, per RTH's suggestion), and not include this warning 
in any existing warning group.  If you copy me, I'll be happy to review 
and approve.  Then, we can move it into some warning group (be it 
-pedantic, -W, -Wformat=2, etc.) at a later date.

--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
(916) 791-8304