From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
To: Branko Cibej <branko.cibej@hermes.si>
Cc: Carlo Wood <carlo@runaway.xs4all.nl>, "egcs@cygnus.com" <egcs@cygnus.com>
Subject: Re: Desire gcc option to skip warnings in standard headers 
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:42:00 -0000
Message-id: <15746.899189654@hurl.cygnus.com>
References: <3597B270.EC811EB4@hermes.si>
X-SW-Source: 1998-06/msg01103.html

  In message < 3597B270.EC811EB4@hermes.si >you write:
  > Carlo Wood wrote:
  > 
  > > | Comments, anybody? Is this the right way to do it?
  > >
  > > I don't like this, I think the new option should turn
  > > warning off if used, but by default give warnings for
  > > system headers too.
  > 
  > That's trivial to do, of course -- most probably I should just invert the
  > meaning of the option. What about the name of the option, though? I don't like
  > -W(no-)system-headers, even though I thought it up myself...
Warnings should be enabled by -W<foo> and disabled by -Wno-<foo>.  I'm
not aware of any that do not follow that convention and I don't think we
should start making any now :-)

The default behavior can either be on or off, that's separate from 
making -W<foo> and -Wno-<foo> do the right thing.

jeff