Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
On 10 Jan 2007 05:47:19 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris Pickett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I assume the -Wno-xxx that are set by default would be moved to the
"default" section?
No. Warnings that are not active by default are obviously disabled,
there is no need to mention them. Actually, we should be more specific
saying that using Wno-* disables a warning no matter what you put on
the commandline, so, strictly speaking, it is false that warnings that
are not enabled by default are equivalent to -Wno-*
I agree. But if Gaby actually meant the -Wxxx that are set by default,
which currently means -Wno-xxx is listed, then yes, those -Wxxx would be
listed in the default section.
| # A <-- B && C option A is implied by options B and C together
Do you have an example of this?
-Wunused-parameter <-- -Wextra && -Wunused
| # A --> B option A implies option B
| # A ==> B option A enables option B
What is the difference between "implies" and "enables" ?
Implies: turning on A turns on B.
Enables: turning on A means that turning on B will have an effect.
There is probably a better wording, maybe "enables" instead of my
"implies", and "is required by" instead of my "enables".
| default --> -Wimport -Wdiv-by-zero -Wendif-labels -Wattributes
-Wmultichar
| -Wnormalized=nfc -Wdeprecated-declarations
-Winvalid-offset-of
| -Wint-to-pointer-cast -Wpointer-to-int-cast
plus others that are not controlled by named flags.
Should all warnings be controlled by some or other flag?
I think so, but there is doc-only work that can be done first.
Insisting on each option being either a super-option or a real option
but never both would fix this.
| -Wimplicit <-- -Wall # redundant implication
Hmm, I don't understand what you mean here.
Me neither. Also, you missed -Werror-implicit-function-declaration
which is a weird and useless option. I have to investigate its
history.
My original graph had:
-Wimplicit-int <-- -Wall
-Wimplicit-function-declaration <-- -Wall
-Werror-implicit-function-declaration
-Wimplicit --> -Wimplicit-int -Wimplicit-function-declaration
-Wimplicit <-- -Wall # redundant implication
The reason I said this last one is redundant is that -Wall is already
documented as turning on both sub-options of the -Wimplicit
super-option. I don't know what to do about it, but my intuition is
that -Wimplicit should go away altogether. For now it seems not
documenting the last line above would be good.
Cheers,
Chris
