[RFC] __extension__ and warnings

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk> writes:

| Neil Booth wrote:-
| 
| > > I'm now imagining turning the DT_* enumeration into a set of bitflags,
| > > so that you could write e.g.
| > > 
| > >   diagnostic (DT_EXTENSION | DT_MANDATED | DT_WARNING, "...")
| > > 
| > > to achieve the effect of 'pedwarn but shut up under __extension__.'
| 
| I think you mean DL_ constants, like I'm using in cpplib?  It was meant
| to stand for diagnostic level.
| 
| > I prefer this.  Fancy changing all error(), warning(), pedwarn(), ...,
| > calls?  8-)
| 
| Roughly there are 1965 error(), 820 warning() and 330 pedwarn() calls;
| this includes the _with variants.  Piece of cake 8-)
| 
| This is probably a good 3.4 project; it would be a great cleanup of our
| diagnostics system.  Do you agree Gaby?

Yes, definitely.

-- Gaby