On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11/01/2011 03:48 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Jason Merrill<ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Paolo Carlini's patch to add -Wnarrowing to -Wc++0x-compat (and thus
>>> -Wall)
>>> broke bootstrap because of narrowing warnings, so I'd like to add
>>> -Wno-narrowing to the stage 2+ warning flags. Is this the best way to do
>>> that?
>>
>> why do we want to include -Wc++0x-compat in -Wall?
>
> It's already included.
yes, that is why I asked. E.g. it isn't obvious that -Wc++0x-compat
ought to be in -Wall at this stage or 4.6.x.
> And I think that "your code won't work in C++11" is
> a warning that most C++ programmers will be interested in if they are asking
> for warnings.
Even when -std=c++03 -Wall or -std=c++98 -Wall?
I would suggest we do this:
1. Include -Wc++0x-compat in -W or -Wextra for THIS release.
2. leave -Wnarrowing in -Wc++0x-compat by default.
3. Make a release note that -Wc++0x-compat will be activated in
the very major release.
