This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: Named warnings
- From: Matt Austern <austern at apple dot com>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>, DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 15:16:56 -0800
- Subject: Re: RFC: Named warnings
On Friday, January 24, 2003, at 02:35 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
--On Friday, January 24, 2003 02:11:31 PM -0800 Stan Shebs
<shebs@apple.com> wrote:
I like this idea as a way of organizing things. It's more
complicated,
but I think it could be a sort of layer superimposed on basic
machinery;
in other words, names can be arbitrary, but if you use the
hierarchical
scheme for a name, you get to ask for groups of warnings "for free".
It's also worth thinking about what you're going to do when the
(English)
message changes. -Wunused-class is a mnemonic for:
warning: class `T' is unused
but if it later becomes apparent that a better way to word the error
is:
warning: class `T' is defined but never referenced
That's a good argument for numeric codes instead of mnemonics.
What do we know about prior art for other compilers? At the
risk of stating the obvious, providing pragmas and command
line options to get fine-grain control over warnings is not
a new idea. We may as well try to learn from other people's
mistakes.
--Matt