On 08/14/2013 05:49 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Eric Blake wrote:
>
>> - gl_AS_VAR_APPEND(m4_defn([gl_Flags]), [" $gl_unknown_warnings_are_errors
>> $1"])
>> + gl_AS_VAR_APPEND(m4_defn([gl_Flags]),
>> +[" $gl_unknown_warnings_are_errors ]m4_bpatsubst([$1], [^-Wno-],
>> [-W])["])
>
> This ass
Eric Blake wrote:
> - gl_AS_VAR_APPEND(m4_defn([gl_Flags]), [" $gl_unknown_warnings_are_errors
> $1"])
> + gl_AS_VAR_APPEND(m4_defn([gl_Flags]),
> +[" $gl_unknown_warnings_are_errors ]m4_bpatsubst([$1], [^-Wno-],
> [-W])["])
This assumes that gl_COMPILER_OPTION_IF's argument is
a constant
As reported by Christophe Fergeau and others, use of the
warnings modules is awkward when probing for negative
warning flags. For example, clang recognizes
-Wno-unused-command-line-argument, but gcc does not;
gcc silently ignores unknown warnings in isolation, but when
something else also causes a
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 06:29:14AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 08/14/2013 01:58 AM, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > gcc handling of -Wno- flags is different from its handling of -W
> > flags as described in
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.8.1/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Wa
On 08/14/2013 01:58 AM, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> gcc handling of -Wno- flags is different from its handling of -W
> flags as described in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.8.1/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning-Options
> :
>
> "When an unrecognized warning option is requested
Hi,
gcc handling of -Wno- flags is different from its handling of -W
flags as described in
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.8.1/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning-Options
:
"When an unrecognized warning option is requested (e.g.,
-Wunknown-warning), GCC emits a diagnostic stating that th
