This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: diagnostic.c reorganization
On Sun, 11 May 2003, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | +/* A "pedantic" warning. Use this for code which triggers a
> | + diagnostic which is required by the relevant language
> | + specification, but which is considered unhelpful (i.e. there isn't
> | + anything *really* wrong with the construct in the language as she
> | + is spoke).
> This comment is unhelpful and inaccurate. Please remove the part
> (i.e. there isn't anything *really* wrong with the construct in the
> language as she is spoke).
> and change "is considered unhelpful" to "GCC consideres too restrictive".
But "considers too restrictive" is still inaccurate - it describes only
if (pedantic) pedwarn (...). The characterisation of pedwarns is simply
that the standard requires the diagnostic and that GCC considers that an
_error_ by default would be too restrictive (except in C++, where pedwarns
are errors by default). Mandatory pedwarns are for code that is clearly
wrong but for which there is a clear interpretation that GCC uses to
compile the code anyway.
Joseph S. Myers