This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Wconversion versus Wcoercion
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu>
- To: Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Ian Lance Taylor" <ian at airs dot com>
- Date: 10 Jun 2006 20:07:02 -0500
- Subject: Re: Wconversion versus Wcoercion
- References: <6c33472e0606081553m1f6ff206t7fd7be77874895bc@mail.gmail.com>
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <lopezibanez@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
| (b) keep the warnings of conversions that may change a value in
| Wconversion and move its original purpose (the warnings about
| prototypes causing ... in the absence of a prototype) to a new option
| (suggestions are welcome).
I prefer this.
I'll like to see a more precise definition of your understanding of
"coercion" versus "conversion". Last time we dicussed this I was not
quite clear about what you consider is "bad" what is not.
I was under the impression you taught it was for "C" only, but you
have to take into account that some warnings are shared with the C++
front-end and some of them really should be common to both front-ends.
If your project is NOT about coercion in general, but those just
related to function prototypes, you should be careful about the name
of the option. Again, this assumes you tell us what you consider
coercion and what you consider conversion.
-- Gaby