On 27 Mar 2007 21:11:56 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| In C, a pedwarn is a warning by default, an error with -pedantic-errors.
|
| In C++, a pedwarn is an error by default, a warning with -fpermissive.
You're describing a defect, not the intended semantics.
In C, a pedwarn is a warning by default, an error with -pedantic errors.
In C++, a pedwarn is a warning by default, an error with -pedantic.
This is not the first time this has come up.
In fact this was done on purpose back in 1998:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/1998-12/msg00137.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-07/msg01060.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-10/msg00680.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-09/msg01200.html
etc.
Also the first change listed on :):
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-2.95/c++features.html
" * Messages about non-conformant code that we can still handle ("pedwarns")
are now errors by default, rather than warnings. This can be reverted
with -fpermissive, and is overridden by -pedantic or -pedantic-errors."
So I don't think this was a mistake or a bug at all. It was on
purpose for sure.
-- Pinski
