This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: -Wall by default
On 4/12/2012 11:06 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
What is nonsensical there?
But they *are* ordinal.
Now? What is the order?
less warnings to more warnings, what could be more
ordered than that!
It works just fine for -O,
Exactly what happens with -O? -On does not necessarily
generate faster or better code when n is higher.
-On means more optimizations for higher n, simple enough?
In fact, -Os is a perfect example of a short name that is NOT
a number.
right, because -Os lies outside the more optimizations for
higher values rule.
I agree with Dave Korn, I do not understand your objection.
I would understand an objection of the general kind that you
prefer mnemonic names to numbers, but that ultimately is just
that a preference, nothing more. You seem on the contrary to
be trying to make a substantive argument against the digit
scheme, but I can't understand it.