On Mon, 10 Jul 2017, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 07/07/2017 10:58 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > This patch is OK. > > > > Thanks. Committed in r250104. > > Do you have any comments on or concerns with changing how > LangEnabledBy interprets the opt argument as I suggested below? > > IMO, it makes little sense for an option that takes an argument > and that specifies a binary option like -Wall in LangEnabledBy > to default to the binary value of the latter option. I think > it would be more intuitive and convenient for it to default to > the value set by its Init directive for the positive form of > the binary option and to zero for the negative form (or to empty > for strings, if that's ever done).
I'm uneasy about the notion of -Wall implying an option that's on-by-default at all. If it's on-by-default, why should -Wall have anything to do with it? (Resetting from 2 to 1 is obviously wrong.) Such an implication only makes sense to me if -Wall implies a *different* (presumably higher) value than the default. And in the case of Init(-1) (for special logic to initialize an option), copying the Init value certainly doesn't make sense in an implication. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com