This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Rename -W to -Wextra ?
On 03-Jun-2002, mike stump <mrs@windriver.com> wrote:
> > From: "Wheeler, Fred (Research)" <wheeler@crd.ge.com>
> > To: "'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
> > Cc: "'phil@jaj.com'" <phil@jaj.com>
> > Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 10:07:20 -0400
>
> > I think -Wallall should add absolutely every -W* option that exists
> > now or is added in the future.
>
> I am more interested in a survey of 20 people that have large projects
> that tried to use such an option and whether they thought there was
> any use for it.
>
> I would be more interested in you trying out such an option, and then
> telling us how wonderful and beneficial it is, and how it helped you.
A long time ago, I wrote a small script that invoked gcc (2.8?)
with all warning options enabled except the following:
# -Wredundant-decls causes too many complaints in system header files
# -Wconversion really only intended to help people using `unprotoize'
# -Waggregate-return not useful, IMHO
# -Wenum-clash doesn't work with gcc 2.7.x
This script has been widely used. For the Mercury project, I used a
variant of this script, which disabled some additional warnings.
If `-Wallall' existed, I would use it. I would not use `-Wallall' on its
own; instead I would use it in combination with the appropriate options
to disable warnings which were more trouble than they are worth, e.g.
`-Wallall -Wno-conversion -Wno-aggregate-return'. But I very much prefer
this model of starting with all warnings enabled and then disabling the
ones that cause trouble.
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne | of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.