From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-11330-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 28218 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2001 21:46:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 28152 invoked by uid 71); 14 Nov 2001 21:46:04 -0000
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 11:35:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20011114214604.28149.qmail@sourceware.cygnus.com>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>
Subject: Re: c/4876: required warning is not given
Reply-To: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00082.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR c/4876; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>
To: jsm28@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org,
   gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, jsm28@cam.ac.uk,
   nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: c/4876: required warning is not given
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:36:46 -0800

 On Wednesday, November 14, 2001, at 11:12 AM, jsm28@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
 > Synopsis: required warning is not given
 >
 > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
 > State-Changed-By: jsm28
 > State-Changed-When: Wed Nov 14 11:12:22 2001
 > State-Changed-Why:
 >     If you want warnings for all constraint violations, use -pedantic.
 
 I don't necessarily want warnings for all constraint violations.  Right now
 
 void xx() { return 3; }
 
 gets a warning but
 
 void xx() { return xx(); }
 
 does not (without -pedantic).  This seems wrong to me.  But if the 
 behavior is
 intentional, OK.