This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: a warning to implement
- From: Michael Matz <matzmich at cs dot tu-berlin dot de>
- To: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>
- Cc: <gdr at codesourcery dot com>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 23:37:11 +0100 (MET)
- Subject: Re: a warning to implement
On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Gaby, perhaps you could be so kind as to enlighten us with the wonderful
> useful meanings that people argued for
> int a = a;
> perhaps we will be so impressed by the suggestions that we will decide to
> implement one of them, rather than generating a warning here.
Your language is getting annoying again.
> The only suggestion I saw, which was to use this construct to turn off
> warnings, seemed very peculiar and ill motivated. In other words, you
> could artificially make it have this meaning, but I would find that
> most peculiar.
As already noted it's fairly irrelevant that you find it peculiar or
useless, or anything. What is relevant, is that there obviously are
people who think it's usefull for that purpose. Perhaps you can suggest
an equivalent alternative to suppress the warning in question in certain
Just to make one thing clear: I'm not arguing either way, if a warning
about 'T x = x;' should be in -Wall or not, or exist at all.