Re: [DOC] List the options enabled by Wextra

[Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>]

Thanks for this further cleanup, Manual.  I wanted to review this
carefully, which took a bit.

On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> The options enabled by Wextra are listed explicitly. This avoids
> duplicated descriptions. This list is the real list according to
> gcc/c-opts and gcc/opts.c. Yes, Wuninitialized is enabled by Wextra.

+There are warning flags are not implied by @option{-Wall}.
       ^^^               ^^^

I believe we've got on "are" too much here?  How about "Note that some
warnings flags actually are not implied by @option{-Wall}."?

+the warning. Some of them are enabled by @option{-Wextra} but many of
+them must be individually enabled.

"...be enabled individually".

+@item -Wextra
+@opindex W
+@opindex Wextra
+(This option used to be called @option{-W}.  The older name is still
+supported, but the newer name is more descriptive.)  This enables some
+extra warning flags that are not enabled by @option{-Wall}:

While we are at it, how about starting with the description (the last
sentence) and the add the note on on -W?  That is, switch these two
parts of the description?  What do you think?

+-Wuninitialized @r{(only with} @option{-O1}@r{,} @option{-O2} @r{or} @option{-O3}@r{)}  @gol

How about making the second part of this read "@option{-O1} and above"?

Also, it seems that -Wuninitialized itself does not refer to -Wextra?  
Should this be added?

+The option @option{-Wextra} also prints warning messages for these
+events:

How about making this "...for the following cases"?

+@item 
+(C++ only) An enumerator and a non-enumerator both appear in a conditional expression.

This lines seems overly long.  

+@item 
+(C++ only) A non-static reference or non-static @samp{const} member appears in a
+class without constructors.

Same here.  (I know the last two issues already predate your patch, but
since we are already making a change here, let's fix this on the way.)

Gerald

:REVIEWPATCH.