From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-117287-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 20197 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2005 02:35:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20179 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jul 2005 02:35:49 -0000
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 02:35:49 +0000
Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j6G2ZlF1000650;
	Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:35:47 -0400
Received: from post-office.corp.redhat.com (post-office.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.227])
	by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j6G2ZlV16163;
	Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:35:47 -0400
Received: from greed.delorie.com (dj.cipe.redhat.com [10.0.0.222])
	by post-office.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j6G2Zlh00848;
	Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:35:47 -0400
Received: from greed.delorie.com (greed.delorie.com [127.0.0.1])
	by greed.delorie.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j6G2ZkSN010463;
	Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:35:46 -0400
Received: (from dj@localhost)
	by greed.delorie.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id j6G2Zfcb010460;
	Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:35:41 -0400
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 02:35:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200507160235.j6G2Zfcb010460@greed.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
To: lucier@math.purdue.edu
CC: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
In-reply-to: <93195b3ade05efbce5e3d6f81272ea2a@math.purdue.edu> (message from
	Bradley Lucier on Fri, 15 Jul 2005 21:27:35 -0500)
Subject: Re: Can't turn off overflow_warning?
References:  <93195b3ade05efbce5e3d6f81272ea2a@math.purdue.edu>
X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00651.txt.bz2


> If I were to propose a patch, which way should I go?

Why not check out my recently posted -Wpragmas patch on gcc-patches?
It takes a set of existing non-optional warnings, and gives them an
option that can be used to disable them, which defaults to on
(i.e. -Wno-pragmas is the useful option).

That way, you get control but the default action stays the same.