[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 0/8] {master} revamp the handling of -W
|
From: |
Akim Demaille |
|
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 0/8] {master} revamp the handling of -W |
|
Date: |
Sat, 16 Feb 2013 14:30:32 +0100 |
Le 14 févr. 2013 à 15:11, Akim Demaille <address@hidden> a écrit :
> This series of patches address a few shortcomings about the handling
> of warning categories:
>
> - Too much duplication.
>
> - Hairy code.
>
> - Théophile pointed out that supports for -Werror=foo has leaked
> to -r and -f (and -ferror=caret, nonsensical, is accepted).
>
> - Joel pointed out that it would be nice to be able to enable
> -Wempty-rule when %empty is used, except if -Wno-empty-rule is
> set, which requires to tell the difference between a disabled
> warning (-Wno-empty-rule), and a warning that was not enabled.
>
> I'd be happy to hear comments. I shall apply these in a couple
> of days. Then I'll proceed on %empty.
All pushed into master.
- [PATCH 5/8] options: simplify the handling of -W, (continued)
- [PATCH 5/8] options: simplify the handling of -W, Akim Demaille, 2013/02/14
- [PATCH 8/8] getargs: minor simplification, Akim Demaille, 2013/02/14
- [PATCH 4/8] options: don't accept "error=" for -f and -r, Akim Demaille, 2013/02/14
- [PATCH 2/8] diagnostics: no longer pretty-print rules in error messages, carets suffice, Akim Demaille, 2013/02/14
- [PATCH 6/8] diagnostics: revamp the handling of -Werror, Akim Demaille, 2013/02/14
- [PATCH 7/8] style: more argument handling of -W into the diagnostics module, Akim Demaille, 2013/02/14
- [PATCH 3/8] diagnostics: factor the list of warning names, Akim Demaille, 2013/02/14
- [PATCH 1/8] options: no longer document warnings when diagnosing an invalid -W, Akim Demaille, 2013/02/14
- Re: [PATCH 0/8] {master} revamp the handling of -W,
Akim Demaille <=