On 18 October 2014 01:43, Joseph S. Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2014, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>
>> The previous version also does not match your description. You are saying
>> that
>>
>> -Wpedantic = warning(OPT_Wpedantic) + pedwarn(OPT_Wpedantic)
>> and -pedantic-errors = pedwarn(OPT_Wpedantic).+ pedwarn(0)
>>
>> The current version says that
>>
>> -Wpedantic = warning(OPT_Wpedantic) + pedwarn(OPT_Wpedantic)
>> and -pedantic-errors = warning(OPT_Wpedantic) + pedwarn(OPT_Wpedantic)
>>
>> My proposal says that:
>>
>> -Wpedantic = warning(OPT_Wpedantic) + pedwarn(OPT_Wpedantic)
>> and -pedantic-errors = warning(OPT_Wpedantic) + pedwarn(OPT_Wpedantic)
>> + pedwarn(0)
>
> None of those three descriptions seems helpful here.
>
> The point of -pedantic is to give a diagnostic whenever the standard
> requires one (and possibly in some other cases). The point of
> -Werror=pedantic is to give an error for diagnostics enabled by -pedantic
> (whether or not the standard requires a diagnostic in those cases, and
> whether or not the standard requires successful translation in those
> cases). The point of -pedantic-errors is to give an error whenever the
> standard requires a diagnostic (and possibly in some other cases, but not
> cases where the standard requires successful translation).
Can we make "possibly in some other cases" more concrete? Otherwise,
the following seems already an improvement to me:
@@ -3318,8 +3327,10 @@
@item -pedantic-errors
@opindex pedantic-errors
-Like @option{-Wpedantic}, except that errors are produced rather than
-warnings.
+Give an error whenever the @dfn{base standard} (see @option{-Wpedantic})
+requires a diagnostic. This is not equivalent to
+@option{-Werror=pedantic}, since there are errors enabled by this option
+and not enabled by the latter and vice versa.
@item -Wall
@opindex Wall
Cheers,
Manuel.
