This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: cpplib: Start moving switch handling to front ends
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>
- Cc: Devang Patel <dpatel at apple dot com>, Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>,Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 11:39:18 -0700
- Subject: Re: cpplib: Start moving switch handling to front ends
- References: <8F40CC42-AAF6-11D6-A6B4-00039362EF82@apple.com> <3D52B166.6020404@apple.com>
On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 10:59:02AM -0700, Stan Shebs wrote:
> >If everybody thinks, it is not OK then I will change it to
> >-Wno-pound-warnings.
>
> "pound" is somewhat cultural - I think of the char as "sharp" (musical),
> and H-P called it "hash". If we do this, we should use terminology from
> the language definition and call it -Wno-warning-directives.
I was considering suggesting -Wno-user-warnings, but I like your
spelling better. And I do not have a problem with FSF GCC accepting
-Wno-#warnings as long as there is an alternate spelling that doesn't
use shell metacharacters, too. (Neil is free to disagree.) Note that
the Bourne shell spec says that # is only magic at the _beginning_ of
a token; not sure what csh does.
To backpedal a bit, it would be _nice_ if we had a general warning
control mechanism, but since we don't and won't get one in time for
3.3, I think that adding more -W options is okay. It's certainly less
trouble than adding -f or -m options, which have a much bigger effect
on the compiler's behavior.
zw