Re: preprocessor/4176: #pragma warnings are "invisible"

Re: preprocessor/4176: #pragma warnings are "invisible"

[neil]

Synopsis: #pragma warnings are "invisible"

State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->closed
State-Changed-By: neil
State-Changed-When: Fri Sep 21 01:24:53 2001
State-Changed-Why:
    -Wunknown-pragmas was acceptable to submitter.
    
    There are a bunch of people who want the current behaviour,
    so we will leave it as it is.  Adding support
    for a new pragma would be a lesser eveil than changing
    behaviour of unknown ones IMO.

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&pr=4176&database=gcc

Re: preprocessor/4176: #pragma warnings are "invisible"

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

The following reply was made to PR preprocessor/4176; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>
To: Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.demon.co.uk>
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: preprocessor/4176: #pragma warnings are "invisible"
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 13:42:44 +0200

 [Neil Booth]
 > But this change in behaviour would annoy people who have pragmas in
 > place that are understood by other compilers, but expect them to be
 > ignored by GCC.
 
 I'm not sure if you are correct in this, as I would expect most people
 want some feedback if part of their code are ignored.
 
 Someone told me about the -Wunknown-pragmas flag, and it fixes
 most of our problem.  I guess it is as good as it get.
 
 Thanks anyway. :-)

Re: preprocessor/4176: #pragma warnings are "invisible"

[Neil Booth]

The following reply was made to PR preprocessor/4176; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.demon.co.uk>
To: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: preprocessor/4176: #pragma warnings are "invisible"
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 12:36:17 +0100

 Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:-
 
 > [neil@gcc.gnu.org]
 > >     Well, we are supposed to ignore warnings we don't understand.
 > >     To me, #warning is canonical with #error and makes more sense than
 > >     #pragma warning.  Adding this pragma would mean
 > >     yet another pragma in the global namespace.
 > >     I'm interested in what others, patricularly Zack, think
 > >     though.
 > 
 > I'm not asking you to add code to understand the pragma, just to add
 > some code to output the complete pragma string for unknown pragmas.
 
 But this change in behaviour would annoy people who have pragmas in
 place that are understood by other compilers, but expect them to be
 ignored by GCC.
 
 Neil.

Re: preprocessor/4176: #pragma warnings are "invisible"

[neil]

Synopsis: #pragma warnings are "invisible"

State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
State-Changed-By: neil
State-Changed-When: Sat Sep 15 09:48:52 2001
State-Changed-Why:
    Well, we are supposed to ignore warnings we don't understand.
    To me, #warning is canonical with #error and makes more sense than #pragma warning.  Adding this pragma would mean
    yet another pragma in the global namespace.
    I'm interested in what others, patricularly Zack, think
    though.

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&pr=4176&database=gcc