------- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-22 18:07 ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Thanks a lot Manuel! Maybe I will even be able to come to this, thanks to your > suggestions for a fix. >
I think there is a problem with my suggestion: -pedantic-errors does not only affect -pedantic warnings but it also affects pedwarns that are not controlled by -pedantic. -Werror=pedantic would only affect those warnings controlled by -pedantic, so it would not be equivalent to -pedantic-errors. :( At the moment where diagnostic_report_diagnostic checks diagnostic_report_warnings_p (location), the machinery does not know that this is a pedwarn. I guess we could pass a special code DK_PEDWARN, and test for flag_pedantic_errors within diagnostic_report_diagnostic so we can reclassify it as DK_ERROR or DK_WARNING; or we could pass a special code DK_PEDERROR and for that code also check diagnostic_report_warnings_p before reclassifying it to DK_ERROR; or we could make a call to diagnostic_report_warnings_p (location) directly in pedwarn before passing down a DK_ERROR. Sorry I can't be more precise. This needs more time to think that I have available. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36901
