From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-173515-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 24839 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2012 13:59:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 24830 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Apr 2012 13:59:45 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-vb0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-vb0-f47.google.com) (209.85.212.47)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 13:59:32 +0000
Received: by vbbfr13 with SMTP id fr13so1144257vbb.20        for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 06:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.29.244 with SMTP id n20mr1694228vdh.22.1333634370668; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 06:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.58.12 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 06:59:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAH6eHdTC37tM1DU6vowabvsb0pjzVSThea3uMnWQQjL=xShEdg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAiZkiDuX94Qf3-1EONGVnxX4nsxhdHLemg9kSZRVVaarTQ-OA@mail.gmail.com>	<4F7D5EB4.2060903@redhat.com>	<CAAiZkiDJ_iB46Q36FQePcfyx7D35OBpdQNKmg9kCTyWMH09SqA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFiYyc25PLAuc-RL7zYqUwBsjQ6kbpVh0FSCEQcVGukYDSkEhg@mail.gmail.com>	<CAAiZkiC_4PqK7YV0yPTijO6t0C2RBVG0PVQDetndwL+M6pdqYQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFiYyc0Lj99FPpAYEmt76o4yS7p9J4A+x1J9Pz=7uPVMEUtJmg@mail.gmail.com>	<CAAiZkiCLkwRjBtw1z8-ZonLj3LtXiOH815yYL1ZgFHekDAp9Ag@mail.gmail.com>	<CAH6eHdTC37tM1DU6vowabvsb0pjzVSThea3uMnWQQjL=xShEdg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 13:59:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAAiZkiB3yYewL28RXLPgFT+ChZDOwBo20XWjHNpeDtqoFGz1vA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: -Wall by default
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>, gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
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
X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00192.txt.bz2

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wro=
te:
> On 5 April 2012 11:03, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>>
>>> Note that some of the above depend on optimization flag settings
>>> (and optimization happening). =A0Those are not good candidates - I think
>>> good candidates are those that would still be fully operational with
>>> -fsyntax-only.
>>
>> I am not sure -fsyntax-only is a good criteria.
>> -fsyntax-only limits the amount of work that the compiler does in terms
>> of code generation, but it should be orthogonal to diagnostic issues.
>
> I don't think this is what you meant, but FWIW -fsyntax-only prevents
> (at least some) template instantiation for C++, which means lots of
> diagnostics are suppressed when using it.

Yes, thanks!

-- Gaby