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: Wconversion versus Wcoercion


On 09/06/06, Eric Christopher <echristo@apple.com> wrote:

I think I like b) the most. That way people who are accustomed to using -Wconversion for value conversions can continue doing so and we can move to something like -Wprototype-conversion or something for the other (and stick the second in -Wall and have -Wconversion be outside of that perhaps... that'd be up to others to debate though).

That would be fine with me.


However, using Wconversion for value conversions is not the documented
purpose. There are several emails and replies in bugzilla stating that
Wconversion has one specific purpose and it should not be used for
anything else. If there has been a decision to change this, I have not
been able to find it in the mailing list archive. I would like to know
if there is someone against moving the original purpose of Wconversion
to a different option like Wprototype-missing-conversion or
Wtraditional-conversion.

On the other hand, it is true that more and more undocumented "value
conversion" features have been added to Wconversion. Even if you don't
like to change the documented behaviour, the reality is that  the
change is already there, it is just that the docs are outdated.

Wcoercion + Wconversion : 0 votes
Wconversion + Wprototype-missing-conversion: 1 (Eric) votes

Cheers,

Manuel.


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