* Segher Boessenkool: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 04:32:50PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: >> On 03/28/2016 01:56 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> >>In Bugzilla PR # 70275, Manuel López-Ibáñez reports that even though >> >>he provides the "-Werror=return-type" option, the compiler doesn't >> >>flag the warning/error about a control reaching the end of a non-void >> >>function, due to the presence of the "-w" option. He points out that >> >>clang++ wtill flags the promoted warning even though warnings are >> >>inhibited. >> > >> >I think -w is ordered with respect to the other warning obtions, and >> >-w inhibits previously requested warnings, and future -W flags may >> >enable other warnings. With this in mind, I agree that the current >> >GCC behavior is consistent and probably not a bug. >> >> The general rule of thumb documented in the manual is that more >> specific options take precedence over more general ones, regardless >> of where they appear on the command line: > > Currently, -w is a nice easy quick way of shutting up all warnings > whenever they are getting in the way. Let's keep it that way.
You mean, by putting -w towards the end of the command line?