On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Martin Sebor <mse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/11/2018 09:44 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On 04/05/2018 07:28 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>>
>>> Attached is the final version of the patch to adjust the lists
>>> of options (C++ Language Options and -Wall) to include missing
>>> C++ options, reference the forms of options that aren't
>>> the default, and use TexInfo tables for the lists of options
>>> in -Wall and -Wextra to address Nathan's comment. The patch
>>> also fixes bug 71283.
>>
>>
>>> -Wnoexcept -Wnoexcept-type -Wclass-memaccess @gol
>>
>> ...
>>>
>>> +-Wclass-memaccess -Wclobbered -Wcomment -Wconditionally-supported @gol
>>
>>
>> -Wclass-memaccess is already in the C++ options summary, I don't think
>> we need to also add it to the diagnostic options summary.
>
>
> Some of these C++-only options are listed in 3.8 Options to
> Request or Suppress Warnings which the See Options to Request
> or Suppress Warnings link under Warning Options points to.
>
> I would expect all the warning options mentioned anywhere in
> 3.8 to be listed in the Warning Options summary. That would
> include all C++-only options in -Wall and -Wextra but not
> other C++-only options (at least not for now). That's what
> I'm aiming for with the patch; I may have missed some.
>
> It seems to me that the most intuitive organization might
> actually be to list all warning options in the Warning Summary
> section, even if some of them are specific to just a subset of
> languages and also listed in language-specific sections. (At
> least for the C family.)
> I often have 3.8 Options to Request or Suppress Warnings open
> in my browser and use it to search for all warning options.
> I find it inconvenient (and prone to error) to have to remember
> to also open 3.5 Options Controlling C++ Dialect to look for
> C++-only options that aren't listed in 3.5.
> Does the approach sound like an improvement to you?
I agree that we want to list the options in both 3.5 and 3.8, but the
argument seems weaker for having them under two headings in the same
summary. Certainly the current state of having some C++ warnings in
the C++ section and some in the warning section is wrong.
>>> -@item -Wsubobject-linkage @r{(C++ and Objective-C++ only)}
>>> +@item -Wno-subobject-linkage @r{(C++ and Objective-C++ only)}
>>> @opindex Wsubobject-linkage
>>> @opindex Wno-subobject-linkage
>>> Warn if a class type has a base or a field whose type uses the anonymous
>>
>>> -@item -Wdelete-incomplete @r{(C++ and Objective-C++ only)}
>>> +@item -Wno-delete-incomplete @r{(C++ and Objective-C++ only)}
>>> @opindex Wdelete-incomplete
>>> @opindex Wno-delete-incomplete
>>> Warn when deleting a pointer to incomplete type, which may cause
>>
>> If you're reversing the sense of the flag, please adjust the
>> documentation to match.
>
> Not sure I understand what part you think needs adjusting.
> I changed it to -Wno- to reflect that the option is enabled
> by default. Can you elaborate?
-Wno-* doesn't mean "Warn...", it means "Don't warn..."
Jason
