This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/12479] System header should not cause -pedantic to error about "extra `;'"
- From: "gdr at integrable-solutions dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 1 Oct 2003 19:19:35 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/12479] System header should not cause -pedantic to error about "extra `;'"
- References: <20031001174228.12479.levon@movementarian.org>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12479
------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2003-10-01 19:19 -------
Subject: Re: System header should not cause -pedantic to error about "extra `;'"
"zack at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
| | Probably. The -pedantic can turn pedwarns into errors. We've had
| | that behaviour for ages.
|
| ... and it is a (long-standing) bug. That's only for -pedantic-errors to do.
The last time this has been discussed, my recollection is that the
intended (and actual) behaviour is that -pedantic can turn some
warnings into errors.
The reason is that by default we may be lenient about some constructs
and/or just warn. But if -pedantic then we may reject such codes because
of them violating some standard text requirements.
The latent bug is that the documentation does not reflect that
intended and actual behaviour.
| | Not in the C++ front-end. That also has been debated to death.
|
| I'm not as familiar with the history there, but surely you agree
| that options like -pedantic should do the same thing in all front ends.
I think -pedantic is front-end dependent just like -ansi.
-- Gaby