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: RFC: -Wall by default


On 12/04/2012 15:55, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/04/2012 15:43, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:

>>> People easily associates some ordering to numbers (usually
>>> the greater the better or in this case the worse) which
>>> creates another set of confusion.

>>  What's the problem?  The greater the number, the more warnings you get.  Simple.
> 
> Not necessarily.

  Your argument makes no sense.  You said that there was a problem because
people will expect numbered -W options to be ordinal.  But they *are* ordinal.
 So people's expectations will be correct.  You haven't said anything about
where the problem is yet, you've just asserted that there will be one without
demonstration or evidence, so again I ask: What's the problem?

  It works just fine for -O, users understand and are happy with that, why
shouldn't it work just as well for -W?

    cheers,
      DaveK


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