Eric Gallager <eg...@gwmail.gwu.edu> writes: > On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 5:51 AM Sebastian Huber > <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: >> >> --- >> htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html | 11 +++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html >> index 8ac08e9a..a183fad8 100644 >> --- a/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html >> +++ b/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html >> @@ -231,6 +231,17 @@ a work-in-progress.</p> >> previous options <code>-std=c2x</code>, <code>-std=gnu2x</code> >> and <code>-Wc11-c2x-compat</code>, which are deprecated but remain >> supported.</li> >> + <li>The following warnings are now errors (see also >> + <a href="porting_to.html">Porting to GCC 14</a>): >> + <ul> >> + <li><code>-Werror=declaration-missing-parameter-type</code></li> >> + <li><code>-Werror=implicit-function-declaration</code></li> >> + <li><code>-Werror=implicit-int</code></li> >> + <li><code>-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types</code></li> >> + <li><code>-Werror=int-conversion</code></li> >> + <li><code>-Werror=return-mismatch</code></li> >> + </ul> >> + </li> >> </ul> >> > > I'd suggest adding the words "by default" to emphasize that they can > be turned back into warnings, and/or disabled. Perhaps others will > have other wording suggestions.
Works for me with that added, although I can't formally approve. It's fine without it though too. > >> <h3 id="cxx">C++</h3> >> -- >> 2.35.3 >>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
