This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: Named warnings
- From: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>
- To: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:17:01 -0800
- Subject: Re: RFC: Named warnings
- References: <004401c2c3cc$d7997ba0$a602623e@philo>
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
What
about -Werror-missing-prototype, -Wwarn-missing-prototype, -Wmissing-prototy
pe, -Wno-missing-prototype? The third would base its behavior on
whether -Werror is specified. This would avoid overloading -E which runs
cpp now.
-Efoo seemed most concise, plus it would stand out better when
reading a long compiler line. Right now only -E by itself is
used, so there's not really an overloading problem. But
-Werror- is sensible too, if people would prefer to go that way.
Stan