[Bug preprocessor/66505] -Wno-error=pedantic does not reverse -Werror -Wpedantic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66505 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|easyhack| --- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4) > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3) > > I believe I'll fix it once patch for PR89051 will be merged. > > Apparently it's more comlicated. Darn. Removing the "easyhack" keyword then...
[Bug preprocessor/66505] -Wno-error=pedantic does not reverse -Werror -Wpedantic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66505 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3) > I believe I'll fix it once patch for PR89051 will be merged. Apparently it's more comlicated.
[Bug preprocessor/66505] -Wno-error=pedantic does not reverse -Werror -Wpedantic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66505 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- I believe I'll fix it once patch for PR89051 will be merged.
[Bug preprocessor/66505] -Wno-error=pedantic does not reverse -Werror -Wpedantic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66505 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=53075 --- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager --- Related to bug 53075
[Bug preprocessor/66505] -Wno-error=pedantic does not reverse -Werror -Wpedantic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66505 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic, easyhack Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2015-06-11 CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to chrysn from comment #0) which indicates that no special-purpose warning exists for the behavior. it has been suggested by redi on irc that a `-Wbinary-constants` should be introduced (along with other specific labels like imaginary-constants) to combat this, and that the relevant code is around libcpp/expr.c:697. You may do this or you may simply use cpp_pedwarning_with_line (pfile, CPP_W_PEDANTIC,...). Every warning that is conditional on an option should use the appropriate CPP_W_* flag corresponding to that option. Thus, every warning that is conditional on CPP_PEDANTIC (pfile) should use CPP_W_PEDANTIC. The guidelines available here https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/DiagnosticsGuidelines for pedwarn/OPT_Wpedantic also apply to libcpp, but using cpp_pedwarning/CPP_W_PEDANTIC. In particular, you may use cpp_pedwarning without CPP_W_PEDANTIC, but you may not use CPP_W_PEDANTIC without cpp_pedwarning and you may not use CPP_PEDANTIC (pfile) without CPP_W_PEDANTIC. I see many cases in libcpp that do not follow these rules and they are likely suffering from the same problem.
