Robert Dewar <de...@adacore.com> writes: > On 2/11/2014 4:45 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> OK, this version drops the "[enabled by default]" altogether. >> Tested as before. OK to install? > > Still a huge earthquake in terms of affecting test suites and > baselines of many users. is it really worth it? In the case of > GNAT we have only recently started tagging messages in this > way, so changes would not be so disruptive, and we can debate > following whatever gcc does, but I think it is important to > understand that any change in this area is a big one in terms > of impact on users.
The patch deliberately didn't affect Ada's diagnostic routines given your comments from the first round. Calling this a "huge earthquake" for other languages seems like a gross overstatement. I don't think gcc, g++, gfortran, etc, have ever made a commitment to producing textually identical warnings and errors for given inputs across different releases. It seems ridiculous to require that, especially if it stands in the way of improving the diagnostics or introducing finer-grained -W control. E.g. Florian's complaint was that we shouldn't have warnings that are not under the control of any -W options. But by your logic we couldn't change that either, because all those "[enabled by default]"s would become "[-Wnew-option]"s. Thanks, Richard
