This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [C++] warn_synth considered obsolete

From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
Cc: gcc at integrable-solutions dot net, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, jason at redhat dot com
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 13:41:16 -0800
Subject: Re: [C++] warn_synth considered obsolete
Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
References: <m13bxkuf41.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net> <41D8B295.7000302@codesourcery.com> <m3brc4rkct.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>

Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:

Out of curiosity, how many such options do we have around,
i.e. options silently accepted but doing nothing?

I'm not sure.

The stated reason we do that is to avoid breaking Makefiles and such. For an option that actually affected semantics that would be a bad idea (in that now the user would expect to get semantics that they no longer get), but for options that do not affect semantics it's a way of making upgrades less painful. If it were up to me, I might just remove the option, but leaving it around is the established protocol, for the reasons given above.

--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
(916) 791-8304

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [C++] warn_synth considered obsolete
  - From: Marcin Dalecki

References:
- [C++] warn_synth considered obsolete
  - From: gcc
- Re: [C++] warn_synth considered obsolete
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: [C++] warn_synth considered obsolete
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]