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]

[patch] Document handling of unrecognized -Wno- options

This came up in an internal thread today.  I've added the
following clarification.

OK for trunk and active branches?

Thanks.  Diego.

	* doc/invoke.texi: Explain how are unrecognized -Wno- warnings

diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index ad8eff8..8b68315 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
@@ -2807,6 +2807,15 @@ two forms, whichever is not the default.  For further,
 language-specific options also refer to @ref{C++ Dialect Options} and
 @ref{Objective-C and Objective-C++ Dialect Options}.
+When an unrecognized warning label is requested (e.g.,
+@option{-Wunknown-warning}), GCC will emit a diagnostic stating
+that the option is not recognized.  However, if the @samp{-Wno-} form
+is used, the behavior is slightly different: No diagnostic will be
+produced for @option{-Wno-unknown-warning} unless other diagnostics
+are being produced.  This allows the use of new @option{-Wno-} options
+with old compilers, but if something goes wrong, the compiler will
+warn that an unrecognized option was used.
 @table @gcctabopt
 @item -pedantic
 @opindex pedantic

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