http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47700
Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
URL| |http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedo
| |cs/gcc-4.5.2/gcc/C_002b_002
| |b-Dialect-Options.html#inde
| |x-Wno_002dold_002dstyle_002
| |dcast-178
Resolution|WORKSFORME |
--- Comment #10 from Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek at gmail dot com> 2011-02-12
13:24:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > This isn't really about a dialect, so it still doesn't make sense.
>
> By "dialect", the manual means "language", as in "warning specific to the C++
> language".
Does it?
> Why it uses the word "dialect" completely escapes to me?
Because a lot of the options are about dialects. Things that allow more (or
less) than standard C++.
> Feel free
> to propose in g...@gcc.gnu.org to change the word and see what people think.
We've got this bug already, I'm not subscribed to that list.
> > And: Why isn't it included in -Wall -Wextra -pedantic?
>
> Because old-style casts are still used everywhere, it is more of a matter of
Even in C++?
> style, and adding new warnings to -Wall -Wextra will break building any
> project
> that uses -Werror for code that is surely working fine. Users complain about
> this all the time.
Isn't that the consequence of using -Werror? I've got perfectly fine code too
that generates warnings.
> (-pedantic is for GCC specific extensions, so it doesn't apply).
