This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: Named warnings
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 17:58:36 +0000 (GMT)
- Subject: Re: RFC: Named warnings
On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> It's really not very hard. You add to the end of an enum. Every
So you have a mnemonic name internally in the enum, but hide it from the
users and the readers of their source code, and still require the
corresponding number to be entered manually in the documentation?
I favour having the mnemonic names visible to users (with -Wwarning-names
to show them only when required), along with a carefully designed
implementation practice that avoids the need to centralise the definitions
of exactly which warnings go in collections such as -pedantic. (That is,
it should be visible at a call to a warning function both what the
individual warning code is and what classes it is in, rather than having
-pedantic cause a huge number of flag variables to be individually
changed.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk