------- Comment #13 from lopezibanez at gmail dot com 2006-09-18 12:45 ------- (In reply to comment #11) > yes please. Actually I created my own patch for bringing the C++ frontend on > ear with the C frontend, but I didn't submit it because it produced bazillions > of (legal) warnings in the code I usually compile, too many to be useful. >
I would like to take a look to your patch if that is possible. A few things worth commenting on the wcoercion patch: 1) One of the development goals is to separate the original behaviour of Wconversion in the C front end from the "other behaviour" of Wconversion (slightly present on the C front end and pervasive in the C++ front end). Therefore, Wconversion has been replaced by Wtraditional-conversion and Wcoercion (the interesting one). The names are tentative, pending discussion by GCC developers, and likely will change in the future. If you find all this confusing, please read http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Wcoercion#Background. If you work in the KDE project, it would be interesting (for me) to know your opinion on how to handle the transition. 2) Wconversion option is not completely deleted by my patch, it still exists for C++/Fortran/ObjC++ when the behaviour has not been modified and it didn't conflict with Wtraditional-conversion or Wcoercion. Properly speaking, these Wconversion warnings should be moved to Wcoercion. However, there is little point on doing this until there is a definitive decision on the names of the new options. Thus, to obtain the full set of coercion warnings in C++ you may need to specify "-Wconversion -Wcoercion" (In short, Wconversion are the ones that were already there undocumented, Wcoercion are new or modified). 3) There are a few issuess pending the review of GCC developers. For example, warning messages could be more specific/informative. 4) I don't think we should pollute this bug report further. Thus, feel free to write me directly. Much better would be to discuss things in public in the gcc mail list: we may even get the attention of some GCC developer. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26167
