This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: cpplib: Start moving switch handling to front ends

Neil Booth wrote:

Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:-

Devang Patel <> writes:

| If everybody thinks, it is not OK then I will change it to | -Wno-pound-warnings.

This, I think, would be less controversial.

I'm with Zack on this: I'm not a fan of these endless switches to
fine-tune the warnings. Someone should come up with a plan to
solve the problem once and for all.

I agree, although the old proposal is distasteful to me, in that it
takes details of message phrasing and glues them into users' sources.

If we're willing to touch the warnings in GCC, we could add an
official name to each one that we want to control, so for instance
you would say

 warning ("comparison-always-true",
   "comparison is always true due to limited range of data type");

and that would automatically create -Wcomparison-always-true and
add to a warning control pragma.  Although the names do add to the
code, warnings-conscious users need well-defined terminology to talk
with each other about which warnings they're interested in.  Explicit
names also allow us to use the same name if the exigencies of coding
require the use to multiple warning() calls for a single kind of


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]