Mark Mitchell wrote: > >I don't see any a priori problem with changing to match the C front end. > > We could of course change some of the pedwarns into errors if we really > >think they ought to be errors. Or, some of them could be ordinary > >warnings when not -pedantic, and pedwarns when -pedantic.
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 12:01:41PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > Sounds like we want a separate category of diagnostic with the current > C++ pedwarn semantics so that we can change pedwarns themselves back to > a warning by default. Agreed. Some have argued that the change makes sense because of consistency arguments. I'm not impressed with that; the compiler is designed to be used, so the question is what most serves the users. If distros wind up having to use -fpermissive extensively, where they didn't before, we have a problem.
