This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patch: New implementation of -Wstrict-aliasing
On 2/3/07, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> wrote:
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> No, we're using the number to mean "the higher the level, the more
> accurate it is; e.g. less false positive". Essentially because higher
> levels demand more computations.
This is not consistent with -Wstrict-aliasing and -Wstrict-aliasing=2
as currently defined.
Hello Gaby and Gerald,
My email on January 30 proposed warning levels in the order
recommended by Gerald. My intention was to be consistent with the
current direction (level 2 = more verbose than 1). However, after
Gaby's comments, I believe that the order should be (higher level =
more effort). This will allow us to add more levels when/if more
advanced analysis becomes available.
I am new to GCC, so I do not understand whether this is consistent
with other warning options, or whether there are any other integration
problems. So I would vote for Gaby's recommendation but would accept
Gerald's as well. In any case, I would like to reach a final decision
as soon as possible. Who gets to make this final decision?
Thank you,
Silvius