Re: formats and syslog question

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU> writes:

| On 14-Sep-2002, Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com> wrote:
| > > > For most users, the use of -pedantic is fairly exotic -
| > > 
| > > If that is the case, it is a pity.
| > > We should not do anything to encourage that state of affairs.
| > 
| > 
| > Well of course the name "pedantic" quite deliberately expresses the opposite
| > viewpoint. In the case of GNAT, you get strictly the standard language (with
| > allowable pragma/attribute extensions), and if you want real language
| > extensions you have to use an option -gnatX.
| 
| Same is true for C++, where -pedantic-errors is the default,

I don't think that is true.  I just did a grep flag_pedantic under cp/
and I found:

   cvt.c:    if (flag_pedantic_errors)
   decl.c:    flag_pedantic_errors = 1;
   decl.c:      int old_flag_pedantic_errors = flag_pedantic_errors;
   decl.c:      pedantic = flag_pedantic_errors = 1;
   decl.c:      flag_pedantic_errors = old_flag_pedantic_errors;
   decl.c:       if (flag_pedantic_errors)


| and you need -fpermissive to disable it.

Well, -fpermissive lets us parse some outdated and antiquicated
constructs, and it is off by default.  But we don't have
-pedantic-errors by default.

[...]

| But I do object to people arguing that we should not mind if `-pedantic'
| results in spurious warnings for Posix programs, because `-pedantic'
| is "exotic"!

But, "-pedantic" is *perceived* exotic by its very name -- and it is
all about perception :-)

-- Gaby