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: Re: patch: don't issue -Wreorder warnings when order doesn't matter


On 30 July 2011 15:56, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> Quoting Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>:
>
>> I would object to changing the behaviour, or if it changes then it
>> should be controllable so I can continue to get the current behaviour,
>> e.g. -Wreorder=0 does what you propose, -Wreorder=1 does what we have
>> now, and -Wreorder is equivalent to -Wreorder=1
>
> That sounds somewhat obscure (e.g. why isn't -Wreorder=0 the same
> as -Wno-reorder), and at some point people might demand negative values
> for more discriminating checks and floating point values for in-between
> choices.
>
> I think more descriptive would be:
> -Wreorder=nonconst and -Wreorder=any
>
> If someone miraculously cheats Rice's theorem, or wants to propose to get
> as close as possible to tell if reordering has a semantic effect as is
> feasible to tell in a compiler, you could call it -Wreorder=relevant or
> somesuch.

Sure, call it -Wreorder=bikeshed if you want to. I don't care what
it's called but I want the current behaviour, so if -Wreorder changes
I want it to be optional.


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