Mark Mitchell wrote: > I think Jason's input would be helpful. I remember having a discussion
about this years ago (1998?), but I don't remember the complete rationale. I think the idea was that we wanted many of these things (ugly old ARM-era C++ things) to be errors, but didn't want to make it impossible to compile old code. They're not "pedantic" in the sense that you only care if you're trying extremely hard to be ISO-conformant; they're things no sane C++ programmer would do at this point, but we want to support for legacy C++ code.
Right. -fpermissive was a kludgey way to make these things errors by default but still allow them to compile.
I don't see any a priori problem with changing to match the C front end. We could of course change some of the pedwarns into errors if we really think they ought to be errors. Or, some of them could be ordinary warnings when not -pedantic, and pedwarns when -pedantic.
Sounds like we want a separate category of diagnostic with the current C++ pedwarn semantics so that we can change pedwarns themselves back to a warning by default.
Jason
