Re: enumerate explicitly what is enabled by Wall

[Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>]

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> With the current text in invoke.texi, it is sometimes difficult to
> tell which options are enabled by Wall. This would be easier if we
> followed the approach for describing -OX, as this patch implements. I
> have also reviewed all the flags actually enabled by Wall in the code.

This certainly brings some nice benefits.  There is, however, one use 
case that I am worried about us losing by this change:  When I started
to use GCC, and a few times thereafter, I went through the list of all 
options below the -Wall description to see whether to explicitly add
some. Recently, in GCC terms ;-), a kind volunteer added a reference to
-Wall to relevant options.  Are you confident this list is correct?  In
that case, consider my comment moot, and this part of the patch is fine.

Your patch also moves -Wfatal-errors which is not listed in the ChangeLog.
Is this change intentional, or ment to be separate?

Please, also note your fixing of @option{-Wstrict-aliasing=3} in the
ChangeLog.

:REVIEWMAIL:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Looks fine to me.  Though we are now in stage 3, I think it's always
> good to improve the documentation.  I'll defer the final decision to
> Mark and the doc maintainers.

Documentation improvements are generally fine also throughout stage 3
as long as they don't break the bootstrap. ;-)  To make sure we document 
this properly, I had a look and indeed http://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html
already refers to "(non-documentation) changes".

Gerald