Re: RFC: Named warnings

[Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>]

Falk Hueffner wrote:-

> > It's really not very hard.  You add to the end of an enum.  Every
> > now and then there's a conflict, and someone has to go first; that's
> > an easier merge than most and it will happen rarely.
> 
> I'm not really sure this will work so well. There might be gcc
> branches with new warnings that are kicked along parallel to the
> "main" gcc for years, and in that time, people either couldn't use the
> warning numbers, or they'd have to change them at merge time.

How is that different from any other merge conflict?

You're not complaining that someone might have to change their #pragma's
from what worked on a experimental branch off an experimental
development compiler, surely?

Neil.