On 07/17/2016 11:52 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
On 15/07/16 18:05, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
+ case OPT_Walloca_larger_than_:
+ if (!value)
+ inform (loc, "-Walloca-larger-than=0 is meaningless");
+ break;
+
+ case OPT_Wvla_larger_than_:
+ if (!value)
+ inform (loc, "-Wvla-larger-than=0 is meaningless");
+ break;
+
We don't give similar notes for any of the other Wx-larger-than=
options. If -Wvla-larger-than=0 suppresses a previous
-Wvla-larger-than=, then it doesn't seem meaningless, but a useful thing
to have.
I'm trying to avoid confusing users that may think that
-Walloca-larger-than=0 means warn on any use of alloca. That is what
-Walloca is for. But really, I don't care. If you feel strongly about
it, I can just remove the block of code.
Aldy
