More C type errors by default for GCC 14

[Paul Koning]

> On May 10, 2023, at 10:39 AM, Eli Zaretskii via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> 
>> ...
>> Sweeping problems under the carpet and hoping no one trips over the 
>> bumps is, at best, pushing problems down the road for future developers.
> 
> I'm not sweeping anything.  This is not GCC's problem to solve, that's
> all.  If the developer avoids dealing with this problem, then he or
> she might be sweeping the problem under the carpet.  But this is not
> GCC's problem.

Agreed.  -Wall -Werror exists for a reason, and choosing to use that it helpful but not necessarily feasible for everyone if confronted with old mouldy code.

I remember a wonderful article (out of MIT?) explaining a whole bunch of somewhat-surprising C standard rules and why they allowed the compiler to do things that many people don't expect.  As I recall, a lot of those were things that Linux didn't want and therefore would suppress with suitable -f<mumble> flags.  "Strict aliasing" may have been one of those -- I still remember my somewhat-surprised reaction when I first learned what that is and why my "obvious" C code was not valid.

I also agree with Eli that using C to write highly reliable code is, shall we say, quite a challenge.  The language just isn't well suited for that.  But GCC also supports Ada.... :-)  and now Modula-2.

	paul