This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org 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: [C++ Patch] PR 50810 (new try)

From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
To: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 09:06:41 -0400
Subject: Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50810 (new try)
References: <4EA5503C.7070202@oracle.com>

On 10/24/2011 07:47 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:

the below is a new variant removing -Wc++0x-compat from -Wall (cannot be
added to -Wextra either because bootstrap passes -W)

I don't understand the rationale for this. If the warning is problematic for bootstrap, why not just add -Wno-narrowing to the bootstrap warning flags? I haven't read the whole discussion thread yet, though.

and also, as
requested by Gaby, preventing -Wno-narrowing from suppressing the
warning in C++0x mode (if the user really needs to silence it,
-Wno-c++0x-compat works). I also added a new testcase for that.

No. I added -Wno-narrowing specifically to suppress the diagnostic in C++0x mode; see c++/49793. There are several diagnostics required by standards that can be suppressed by -Wno- flags, such as -Wno-long-long.

Jason

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50810 (new try)
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50810 (new try)
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis

References:
- [C++ Patch] PR 50810 (new try)
  - From: Paolo Carlini

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