This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Warnings about rcs_id strings: let's settle this
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- To: Kean Johnston <jkj at sco dot com>
- Cc: 'Zack Weinberg' <zack at codesourcery dot com>, 'Joe Buck' <jbuck at synopsys dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 19:59:51 +0100 (BST)
- Subject: RE: Warnings about rcs_id strings: let's settle this
- References: <009701c310d8$fe0b7550$03419384@shrike>
On Fri, 2 May 2003, Kean Johnston wrote:
> I just don't think const should be a factor, because by FAR the largest
> problem area is legacy code, not necessarily code that gets a different
> warning between 3.3 version 3.2. That simply exposes the problem, it
> doesn't define it.
The only basis for adding a new option at all at this stage for 3.3 would
be the regression that -Wunused-variable now warns for static const
variables, which it didn't warn for previously and which is in
contradiction of its documentation. Not to change the established
documented behaviour for nonconst variables, which has been around since
at least EGCS 1.1.2 and doesn't seem to have generated complaints before.
-Wall does have a definition, given in the manual:
This enables all the
warnings about constructions that some users consider
questionable, and that are easy to avoid (or modify to prevent
the warning), even in conjunction with macros.
Addition of const is an easy modification.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk