From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 89203 invoked by alias); 23 Jan 2019 07:31:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 89185 invoked by uid 89); 23 Jan 2019 07:31:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=00am, H*i:sk:E7F0A17, H*f:sk:E7F0A17, H*MI:sk:E7F0A17 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 07:31:22 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B58E9B307; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 07:31:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-69.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.69]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0957D662E4; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 07:31:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x0N7VGZW029480; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 08:31:16 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x0N7VEM0029479; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 08:31:14 +0100 Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 07:31:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= Cc: Martin Sebor , Thomas Koenig , gcc mailing list , "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: [RFC] -Weverything Message-ID: <20190123073114.GA30353@tucnak> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <80e1821d-b6da-c6b6-2bf2-29734f5fd34e@netcologne.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-01/txt/msg00185.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 08:17:00AM +0100, Thomas König wrote: > > > > Am 23.01.2019 um 01:53 schrieb Martin Sebor : > > > I often wish GCC supported it -- not in the hopes of finding every > > conceivable bug or transgression against known coding styles but > > as a tool to discover warnings that have to be explicitly enabled > > either by using their own options or by specifying a higher level > > than the default. > > So, maybe an option to list every warning would be better? > > I am sure the number of people doing > > gcc `gcc —list-warnings=all` > > and complaining about the result be small 😉 We have that, gcc -Q --help=warning Of course, for warnings which do require arguments (numerical, or enumeration/string), one still needs to pick up his choices of those arguments; no idea what -Weverything would do here, while some warnings have different levels where a higher (or lower) level is a superset of another level, what numbers would you pick for e.g. warnings where the argument is bytes? And, I agree -Weverything is a terrible idea. Jakub