DJ Delorie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > I don't care if it's spelt warn_foo, OPT_Wfoo, warning_p(foo) or | > whatever, so long as it's spelt only one way. The 'warning | > (OPT_Wfoo, ...)' syntax helps only where there is no conditional | > before the warning -- how often does that occur? The way it | > currently is, one runs the risk of writing | | It's confusing now because it's in transition. Eventually, the use of | warn_foo will become rare, and the OPT_foo will be the preferred | method of controlling diagnostics. Only 664 more warnings to go!
The sooner, the better :-) -- Gaby
