On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 6:47 AM, Paolo Carlini<paolo.carl...@oracle.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the below is a new variant removing -Wc++0x-compat from -Wall (cannot be
>>> added to -Wextra either because bootstrap passes -W) and also, as
>>> requested
>>> by Gaby, preventing -Wno-narrowing from suppressing the warning in C++0x
>>> mode (if the user really needs to silence it, -Wno-c++0x-compat works). I
>>> also added a new testcase for that.
>>>
>> OK with a minor correction. This bit
>>
>> +With -std=c++0x, @option{-Wno-c++0x-compat} can be used to suppress
>> +the diagnostic required by the standard.
>>
>> should not be there. It is currently an accident of implementation
>> detail as opposed to a feature. It needs no advertisement.
>
> Ok. But I actively made it possible, if you want I can remove the
> possibility altogether, the patch also becomes cleaner ;)
>
Yes, I have been saying all long that -Wflag is not the way to
suppress a standard semantics. So, if you can make the patch
cleaner without that, then the better! :-)
