Warnings in the C++ Front-End and GCC in General

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 199809070744.AAA11440@smtp.earthlink.net >you write:
  > 
  > First, two prefatory notes:
  > 
  >   o This message is being sent to both egcs and egcs-patches.  The
  >     reason is that while it *is* a patch, it is also about a topic
  >     that bears more general discussion amongst GCC users as well as
  >     GCC developers.  Therefore, if you are a GCC user, you should 
  >     read on, stopping when the discussion of the actual changes
  >     begins.
  > 
  >   o This message does not contain the complete patch checked in to the
  >     C++ front-end.  The reason is that the patch is very large, and
  >     much of it is very repetitive.  Therefore, only the "interesting"
  >     portions, and representative samples of the "boring" pieces, are
  >     included.  You should *not* try to apply this patch to your
  >     source-tree, as you will not get the complete set of changes.
Can we avoid revamping this stuff until after the next gcc2 -> egcs
merge?  It would be nice to have the internationalization code mostly
drop in without taking days of my time to resolve conflicts :-)

  > This patch addresses a long-standing need in GCC: the ability to
  > disable individual warnings.  Until now, we have had the coarse
  > -W/-Wall/-w switches, and the -Wno- switches for controlling certain
  > categories of warnings.  However, some warnings have not been under
  > the control of individual switches.  In fact, it does not make sense
  > to add individual switches for each of the literally hundreds
  > (thousands?) of diagnostics GCC can issue!
Well, I'm not so sure I agree this is needed or desirable.  I'll go with
the group decision, but my gut tells me this isn't such a great idea.

jeff