From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-143379-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 20666 invoked by alias); 9 Jan 2008 18:18:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 20648 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Jan 2008 18:18:53 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com (HELO rv-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.198.188)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 18:18:25 +0000
Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id g11so324663rvb.56         for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:18:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.141.71.8 with SMTP id y8mr613875rvk.32.1199902703275;         Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:18:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.141.189.18 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:18:23 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <de8d50360801091018g903fc34s307412329b2f5c69@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 18:18:00 -0000
From: "Andrew Pinski" <pinskia@gmail.com>
To: "Benjamin Kosnik" <bkoz@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Changes in C++ FE regarding pedwarns to be errors are harmful
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
In-Reply-To: <200801091810.m09IAZFf027889@porkchop.devel.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <200801082328.22849.ismail@pardus.org.tr> 	 <200801082345.30788.ismail@pardus.org.tr> 	 <6c33472e0801081428l33bfb4a9vf87e51d8b6b7eaf8@mail.gmail.com> 	 <200801090324.03828.ismail@pardus.org.tr> 	 <6c33472e0801081825i648f0f58x38fb46a57c4e716a@mail.gmail.com> 	 <m38x2zymje.fsf@localhost.localdomain> 	 <200801091810.m09IAZFf027889@porkchop.devel.redhat.com>
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: 2008-01/txt/msg00094.txt.bz2

On 1/9/08, Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com> wrote:
> Me too. The current error behavior just seems gratuitous. What was the
> rationale for this change to error instead of warn? I am having
> problems locating this discussion on gcc-patches.

The recent preprocessor change or the older front-end change?

The older front-end change was done at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/1998-12/msg00137.html .

The preprocessor change was done so the front-end was constaint with
the preprocessor and this was
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24924.

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski