This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Lots of suggestions for the gcc manual
- From: kaih at khms dot westfalen dot de (Kai Henningsen)
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 14 Sep 2003 19:43:00 +0200
- Subject: Re: Lots of suggestions for the gcc manual
- Comment: Unsolicited commercial mail will incur an US$100 handling fee per received mail.
- Organization: Organisation? Me?! Are you kidding?
- References: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0309130347490.24873@blinky>
firstname.lastname@example.org (Stephan Thomas Lavavej) wrote on 13.09.03 in <Pine.GSO.4.58.0309130347490.24873@blinky>:
> I propose a clearer layout would be to begin the document with
> -fsyntax-only, -pedantic, -pedantic-errors, and -w as it currently
> does, and then to begin a whole new section: Warnings Included In -Wall.
> Every warning that -Wall enables would go in that section and nothing
> else. If a warning can be further modified, as -Wformat can be, then
> it should link to /another/ section that explains all the modifications
> that can be done, but under no circumstances should any warnings not
> in -Wall appear in the -Wall section.
I have an alternate proposal: every warning that is in -Wall should be
`-Wformat' (in -Wall)
and similar for -Wextra.
Oh, and for always-on-but-can-be-disabled there should be a similar remark
right after the option name, possibly "(default on)". Similar "(C++ only)"
and whatever else seems appropriate.
Apart from that, I'd like these to be sorted strictly alphabetically.
Another thing that would be very good would be to include the exact
warning text(s) triggered by the warnings; this would make it much easier
to find the relevant option when you have a message (and that option is,
after all, the only place you are likely to find any kind of explanation).