This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
where should C++ options be documented?
- From: Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>
- To: GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 19:33:44 -0600
- Subject: where should C++ options be documented?
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