* Jakub Jelinek:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 04:15:26PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:11:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> > * Marek Polacek:
>> >
>> > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 10:56:36AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> > >> --- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
>> > >> +++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
>> > >> @@ -6183,6 +6183,7 @@ that have their own flag:
>> > >> @gccoptlist{
>> > >> -Wimplicit-function-declaration @r{(C)}
>> > >> -Wimplicit-int @r{(C)}
>> > >> +-Wincompatible-pointer-types @r{(C)}
>> > >> -Wint-conversion @r{(C)}
>> > >> -Wnarrowing @r{(C++)}
>> > >> -Wreturn-mismatch @r{(C)}
>> > >
>> > > BTW, should the C ones mention Objective-C as well?
>> >
>> > Isn't there Objective-C++ as well? I assumed it applied to both
>> > dialects.
>>
>> I think we usually spell both, if they apply. But you can leave it as it is.
>
> Seems we use (C and Objective-C only) (40 times) in preference to (C only)
> (4 times), (C++ and Objective-C++ only) (61 times) in preference to (6
> times), but (C and C++ only) (5 times) and never all 4 languages, even
> when I think it is very likely some switch would be C only, C++ only or
> C and C++ only. And (C) is used just for Copyright ;)
So it should say “C and Objective-C only” for the C stuff, and “C++ and
Objective-C++ only” for -Wnarrowing?
Jason, does the -Wnarrowing aspect of -fpermissive apply to
Objective-C++ as well, or is it stuck at C++98?
Thanks,
Florian
