On 13/01/2008, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> I think all others should change to permerrors.
I only meant all others in cp/decl.c of course - here are the remaining files.
Again I've only listed the ones that should remain as pedwarns and
other special cases - most change to permerrors.
In cp/error.c we have
/* Warn about the use of variadic templates when appropriate. */
void
maybe_warn_variadic_templates (void)
{
if ((cxx_dialect == cxx98) && !in_system_header)
/* We really want to suppress this warning in system headers,
because libstdc++ uses variadic templates even when we aren't
in C++0x mode. */
pedwarn ("ISO C++ does not include variadic templates");
}
Another interesting one. Variadic templates work in C++98 mode and
are used internally, but currently you have to say -fpermissive to use
them in user code. That flag is *usually* needed for
backward-compatibility, not enabling *future* extensions.
If this becomes a permerror that behaviour will be preserved, if it
stays as a pedwarn then users will only get a warning for
variadic-templates in C++98.
So is support for variadic templates in -std=gnu98 mode an official
extension, or a detail not-for-public-consumption?
the pedwarns in except.c, friend.c and init.c should be permerrors
at name-lookup.c:728 we have:
if (pedantic && ! DECL_IN_SYSTEM_HEADER (x))
pedwarn ("redeclaration of %<wchar_t%> as %qT",
TREE_TYPE (x));
guarded by pedantic, so leave as pedwarn
and later at line 1177
pedwarn ("name lookup of %qD changed for new ISO %<for%> scoping",
DECL_NAME (decl));
pedwarn (" using obsolete binding at %q+D", decl);
This is currently inaccurate, it says "using obsolete binding" but
because pedantic-errors is on it doesn't use it - you get a fatal
error.
Leaving this as a pedwarn would make the diagnostic accurate, but
personally I think it's right that this is a fatal error, so it should
change to permerror and the second line should be changed to
"(if you use -fpermissive G++ will accept your code)"
as used in lex.c and parser.c
The others in cp/name-lookup.c should be pedwarns.
In cp/parser.c your patch already changes one pedwarn. I think all
others should change unless guarded by if (pedantic), as this allow
GNU extensions like long long.
There are a couple of exceptions...
There's this oddity on line 13685
if (!parser->default_arg_ok_p)
{
if (!flag_pedantic_errors)
warning (0, "deprecated use of default argument for parameter of
non-function");
else
{
error ("default arguments are only permitted for function
parameters");
default_argument = NULL_TREE;
}
}
I think for consistency with the new proposed behaviour it should
check flag_permissive, instead of !flag_pedantic_errors, do you agree?
on line 14511:
if (scope == nested_name_specifier)
{
pedwarn ("extra qualification ignored");
nested_name_specifier = NULL_TREE;
num_templates = 0;
}
how confusing - a fatal error that says the problem was ignored :-)
I think this should be a permerror, but maybe the text should say
"extra qualification not allowed"
The other pedwarns in cp/parser.c that are not guarded by pedantic
should be permerrors.
In cp/pt.c all pedwarns except these should be permerrors:
line 14284
if (pedantic && !in_system_header)
pedwarn ("ISO C++ forbids the use of %<extern%> on explicit "
"instantiations");
This is a GNU extension, leave as pedwarn
line 14370
if (pedantic && !in_system_header)
pedwarn("ISO C++ forbids the use of %qE on explicit instantiations",
storage);
GNU extension, leave as pedwarn
The others in cp/pt.c should be permerrors.
The pedwarn in cp/semantics.c should be a permerror
In cp/typeck2.c I think cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic should continue
to use pedwarn on line 347, but line 697 should be a permerror.
In cp/typeck.c the pedwarns guarded by pedantic should stay as pedwarns.
on line 5356 there is:
if (pedantic)
/* Only issue a warning, as we have always supported this
where possible, and it is necessary in some cases. DR 195
addresses this issue, but as of 2004/10/26 is still in
drafting. */
warning (0, "ISO C++ forbids casting between pointer-to-function and
pointer-to-object");
This could switch to a pedwarn, since that will still be a warning
under the permerror proposal. That would mean it can be turned into a
fatal error with -pedantic-errors instead of -Werror, which would be
consistent with other warnings that are only enabled by -pedantic.
I'm not sure how "conditionally-supported behaviour" should interact
with -pedantic-errors so let's leave as a warning for now.
The others (including the one in build_x_compound_expr_from_list)
should change to permerrors
Is that all of them? Would you prefer a patch to make the changes or
are you going to go through them yourself anyway?
Jon
