This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
- From: "manu at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 2 Jul 2010 10:56:22 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
- References: <bug-44774-13511@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-02 10:56 -------
Why? All of them do, except -pedantic. I don't see any reason for -pedantic
being exceptional. Or can I start proposing warnings options that do not start
with -W?
Should we introduce a special case for pedantic (code and documentation) for
-Werror= and for -Wno-error= and for -Wno-? I can start opening PRs for the
missing special cases.
We would also need to introduce (and handle specially) -no-pedantic and
-no-pedantic-errors.
All the above is free if we just make -Wpedantic an alias for -pedantic.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774