This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: suggest gcc option -Wallall to add absolutely every -W* option
- To: Alexandre Oliva <oliva at dcc dot unicamp dot br>
- Subject: Re: suggest gcc option -Wallall to add absolutely every -W* option
- From: John Vickers <jvickers at acorn dot com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 12:51:39 +0000
- CC: Joern Rennecke <amylaar at cygnus dot co dot uk>, vonbrand at inf dot utfsm dot cl, wheeler at ipl dot rpi dot edu, egcs at cygnus dot com
- References: <199811171651.QAA25790@phal.cygnus.co.uk> <or1zn2urtq.fsf@araguaia.dcc.unicamp.br>
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> On Nov 17, 1998, Joern Rennecke <amylaar@cygnus.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> > Do something radical: Use -Wall. It is supposed to turn on _all_ warnings,
> >> > isn't it?
That is kinda what one might expect it to do. Would it turn on
-Wid-clash-7 ? Some of the warnings (which I've never tried,
but are listed in the info) seem a bit obscure. "-Wall" seems out
because people expect it to do what it does now.
"-Wyes_I_really_do_mean_all_of_them" ?
I vote for Alexandre's idea:
> Renaming a widely used option is never a good idea... We must find a
> new name for the new option, no matter how misleading the existing
> option name is. How about accepting a number after -W, so that one
> could ask the compiler to be more or less picky? -W0 would be no
> warnings, -W1 the default, -W2 == -Wall, -W3 == -W -Wall, and -W99
> would enable all possible warnings.