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: where should C++ options be documented?


On 4/2/18, Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jason,
>
> The manual mentions some C++-only options in the language
> independent section 3.8 Options to Request or Suppress
> Warnings and others in 3.5 Options Controlling C++ Dialect.
>
> For example, -Wcatch-value, -Wconditionally-supported,
> and -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant are mentioned only
> on the former page, while -Wabi-tag, -Wctor-dtor-privacy,
> -Wliteral-suffix, and -Wclass-memaccess are mentioned only
> on the latter.
>
> That makes C++ options harder to find than they should be.
> It also makes it difficult to tell which C++ options are
> included in -Wall or -Wextra.  I think we should converge
> on the same approach for all C++ options that doesn't have
> these problems.  What should it be?
>
> An approach that I think might work well is to continue
> to mention even C++-only options in 3.8 but move their
> descriptions to 3.5 (i.e., have the entry for each link
> to the full description of the option on the C++ page).
>
> Should I try to make this happen for GCC 8?
>
> Martin
>

This is bug 71283: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71283


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