[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Update of bug #59030 (project groff): Category:None => Core Status:None => Need Info Assigned to:None => gbranden Summary: som

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #59030 (project groff): Also, it appears that -E implies -Ww. I'm undecided as to whether it should. It makes sense if there is an ordering over diagnostic levels, and not if it doesn't. ___ Reply to this item at

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #59030 (project groff): [comment #3 comment #3:] > It makes sense if there is an ordering over diagnostic levels, and not if it doesn't. s/it doesn't/there isn't/ "Level" does indeed imply that there is, but that language is not used in groff documentation. As I recal

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Follow-up Comment #5, bug #59030 (project groff): [comment #2 comment #2:] > I am kind of chagrined that my efforts failed here, though. Your efforts didn't fail; my reading failed. More specifically, I encountered this on an earlier release that lacked the word "error," overlooked that word on

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Follow-up Comment #6, bug #59030 (project groff): [comment #3 comment #3:] > Also, it appears that -E implies -Ww. > > I'm undecided as to whether it should. Yeah, I can see arguments either way, though if it continues to work this way, this should be documented. [comment #4 comment #4:] > err

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Follow-up Comment #7, bug #59030 (project groff): I'm inclined to leave this open for the time being as just a documentation bug. But I'd like to hear from other groff folks to see what they think. I'm sure there is some resistance to adding another warning category, since they're encoded as bit

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Follow-up Comment #8, bug #59030 (project groff): I wouldn't necessarily advocate for a new category either. Having well-chosen categories means that new situations that come up should be able to fit into your existing category framework. Unfortunately, That's not necessarily the path (g)roff ha

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Follow-up Comment #9, bug #59030 (project groff): gbranden wrote: > I'm fairly militant about diagnostic messages always including their diagnostic level. I like that, and i think it makes a lot of sense in multiple levels. > I'm undecided as to whether it should. I think it is very good that

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Update of bug #59030 (project groff): Item Group:None => Documentation Status: Need Info => In Progress ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Update of bug #59030 (project groff): Status: In Progress => Fixed Open/Closed:Open => Closed Planned Release:None => 1.22.5

[bug #59030] some warnings [errors] still emitted with -Ww

Follow-up Comment #11, bug#59030 (group groff): commit b954f67228616a542af26729393c9156005fd3e1 Author: G. Branden Robinson Date: Wed Sep 2 04:59:08 2020 +1000 Document that [gt]roff -E implies -Ww. * src/roff/groff/groff.1.man (Options) <-E>: * src/roff/troff/troff.1.man (Op