This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Should a disabled warning be allowed to be promoted to an error(Bugzilla PR 70275)?
- From: Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>
- To: <kevin-tucker at cox dot net>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, dodji at redhat dot com, dmalcolm at redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:56:45 +0200
- Subject: Re: Should a disabled warning be allowed to be promoted to an error(Bugzilla PR 70275)?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160328142309 dot CKMHR dot 556080 dot imail at eastrmwml106>
> In Bugzilla PR # 70275, Manuel López-Ibáñez reports that even though
> he provides the "-Werror=return-type" option, the compiler doesn't
> flag the warning/error about a control reaching the end of a non-void
> function, due to the presence of the "-w" option. He points out that
> clang++ wtill flags the promoted warning even though warnings are
I think -w is ordered with respect to the other warning obtions, and
-w inhibits previously requested warnings, and future -W flags may
enable other warnings. With this in mind, I agree that the current
GCC behavior is consistent and probably not a bug.