From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12825 invoked by alias); 2 May 2003 22:36:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 12805 invoked by uid 71); 2 May 2003 22:36:01 -0000 Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 22:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030502223601.12804.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Neil Booth Subject: Re: c/10604: -Wall includes sign conversion warning [3.3 regression] Reply-To: Neil Booth X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00160.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c/10604; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Neil Booth To: Zack Weinberg Cc: ak@suse.de, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c/10604: -Wall includes sign conversion warning [3.3 regression] Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 23:28:07 +0100 Zack Weinberg wrote:- > > It looks like this was experimentally changed as part of the C > option-parsing rewrite; since it clearly causes problems, it should be > put back the way it was. I am testing the appended patch; Mark has Oops, am I behind all this 8-) I was trying to make C and C++ consistent; I thought the differences (and there were quite a few) were oversights. I think that all except this one were. Neil.