From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22372 invoked by alias); 11 Jun 2008 14:48:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 22362 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jun 2008 14:48:10 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:47:42 +0000 Received: from zps38.corp.google.com (zps38.corp.google.com [172.25.146.38]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id m5BElYBH000969; Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:47:35 +0100 Received: from smtp.corp.google.com (spacemonkey3.corp.google.com [192.168.120.116]) by zps38.corp.google.com with ESMTP id m5BElXPC017727 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 Jun 2008 07:47:34 -0700 Received: from localhost.localdomain.google.com (69-36-227-135.cust.layer42.net [69.36.227.135] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.corp.google.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m5BElVG2013288 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 Jun 2008 07:47:33 -0700 To: Volker Reichelt Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: C++ warnings vs. errors References: From: Ian Lance Taylor Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:48:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Volker Reichelt's message of "Wed\, 11 Jun 2008 16\:12\:18 +0200 \(CEST\)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-06/txt/msg00270.txt.bz2 Volker Reichelt writes: > since Manuel's patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg00962.html > a lot of C++ code is now accepted on mainline (when compiling without > special flags like -fpermissive and -pedantic), that used to be rejected. > Instead of getting closer to the standard we get away from it, which is a > bad idea IMHO - especially since the standard should be widely adopted by > now, given that it's about 10 years old. So here's a collection of some > warnings that I'd rather see as errors: It sounds like you want to change some pedwarns to permerrors. Go for it. Ian