http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48062
--- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-09 07:55:37 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Produces no warning. So for me it is a bit confusing, since the warning > setting > refers to pieces of code and not to variables. You are right and it is a bug. The reason is that each warning message (the second should be note) is produced by different calls to warning(). These calls are conditional on Wshadow but the #pragmas only disable Wshadow for a certain location. The fix is to make "shadowed declaration is here" a call to inform() (that is, a note) conditional on the first warning being emitted, which one can test by checking the return value of warning(). Patches welcome.
