Re: RFC: -Wall by default

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com> wrote:
> On 4/9/2012 1:08 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Gerald Pfeifer<gerald@pfeifer.com>
>> ?wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 8 Apr 2012, Robert Dewar wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Do you really want me to file hundreds of bug reports that are for
>>>> cases of uninitialized variables well known to everyone, and well
>>>> understood by everyone, and not easy to fix (or would have been
>>>> fixed long ago)?
>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps we should move this class of warning from -Wall to -Wextra?
>>>
>>> (I'd prefer that over introducing yet another option -Wstandard.)
>>
>>
>> That would be my preferred solution -- by far. ?But, my understanding
>> is that that would provoke a riot so I am willing to compromise by
>> introducing
>> a new warning switch (even if I dislike that thought.)
>> Hopefully, it is it is going to be the default, most people would not have
>> to learn yet another GCC switch.
>
>
> I would not like to see -Wall lose warnings that it has now, and I think
> others would find that a problme. -Wextra may be too much for that same
> group of people.
>
> We have certainly found it useful to have three general categories of
> warnings in GNAT
>
> a) the warnings that are on by default
> b) the warnings that are turned on by -gnatWa (similar to -Wall)
> c) all warnings (tunred on by -gnatw.e)

We are in agreement.  I was just explaining to Gerald that his proposal
would have been my first choice, but I am compromising by moving to
your suggestion.  My complaint is the introduction of a new switch
just to accomodate warnings that should not have been in -Wall.  But,
I can live with that.

>
>>
>>>
>>> Gerald
>
>