On 06/01/2014 19:27, Richard Smith wrote:
We need to figure out what -Wsystem-headers should do in some corner cases. In particular:

* If I -Werror= a warning, and I have -Wsystem-headers, and the warning occurs in a system header, what should happen? * If I use -Werror=system-headers, and a DefaultError warning (like -Winvalid-constexpr) is issued in a system header, what should happen? * If I use -Werror=system-headers, and a (non-promoted-to-error) warning occurs in a system header, what should happen? * If I use -Werror globally, and I have -Wsystem-headers enabled, and a warning is produced in a system header, what should happen?

One possible approach would be to set the apparent severity of diagnostics in system headers to max(warning severity, -Wsystem-headers severity). So -Wsystem-headers would allow warnings (but not errors) to be produced in system headers, and -Werror=system-headers would also allow errors to be produced in system headers.

Getting -W[no-]error=system-headers play ball sounds like it'd need work given what a special case it is, with limited use cases for all that flexibility. My motivation here was just to make -Wsystem-headers safe to enable at all.

I suspect -Wsystem-headers -Werror should treat all header warnings as errors though. Think we have a workable solution if I update the proposed patch with that case?

- // Ensure that -Wsystem-headers never introduces errors due to mapping.
-      Result = DiagnosticIDs::Warning;
+ // Ensure that -Wsystem-headers doesn't introduce errors due to mapping.
+      if (!Diag.WarningsAsErrors)
+        Result = DiagnosticIDs::Warning;


Another would be your current patch (never produce errors in system headers).

Just to clarify, the patch only prevents new errors being introduced by -Wsystem-headers that would not otherwise fire. It doesn't suppress any other errors that usually fire in system headers.


Another would be to treat all warnings in system headers as if they're controlled by the -Wsystem-headers flag (so -Werror=system-headers would promote them all to errors, as would -Werror -Wsystem-headers).

Would that need early checks on the warning location to see if it's in system headers? The check is described as expensive so I've left it until just before emission.

Alp.




Maybe there's another, better, option.

Thoughts?

On Sun Dec 29 2013 at 7:01:45 AM, Alp Toker <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    The -Wsystem-headers option was enabling warnings that got upgraded to
    errors
    through mappings like DefaultError. In a normal build these errors
    are fully
    suppressed.

    This patch makes -Wsystem-headers consistent with ordinary
    behaviour by
    restoring mapped errors in system headers to warnings, ensuring
    that the
    option
    can never cause build failures.

    The test case extends existing checks added in r169689 / PR14550.

    Alp.

    --
    http://www.nuanti.com
    the browser experts


--
http://www.nuanti.com
the browser experts

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to