Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How about: have -Wall still set warn_strict_overflow
> to 1, but to have -Wall -Wstrict-overflow *or* -Wstrict-overflow -Wall
> *or* just -Wstrict-overflow set it to 2? The only change would be
> to prevent -Wall from *decreasing* the value.
Sure, makes sense.
But, consider:
case OPT_Wall:
...
warn_char_subscripts = value;
warn_missing_braces = value;
warn_parentheses = value;
warn_return_type = value;
warn_sequence_point = value; /* Was C only. */
...
warn_switch = value;
...
warn_address = value;
warn_strict_overflow = value;
or
if (optimize >= 2)
{
flag_thread_jumps = 1;
flag_crossjumping = 1;
flag_optimize_sibling_calls = 1;
flag_forward_propagate = 1;
flag_cse_follow_jumps = 1;
flag_gcse = 1;
flag_expensive_optimizations = 1;
flag_ipa_type_escape = 1;
flag_rerun_cse_after_loop = 1;
flag_caller_saves = 1;
flag_peephole2 = 1;
...
If we want to fix this issue, it seems to me we should fix it
everywhere.
Ian
