[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Guile-commits] GNU Guile branch, stable-2.0, updated. v2.0.6-97-ge8

From: Mark H Weaver
Subject: Re: [Guile-commits] GNU Guile branch, stable-2.0, updated. v2.0.6-97-ge8772a9
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 14:13:05 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux)

Hi Ludovic,

"Ludovic Courtès" <address@hidden> writes:
> commit 9ee0455738f90086894d602075915d49a5044fb7
> Author: Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden>
> Date:   Sat Nov 24 00:16:14 2012 +0100
>     Turn on the `case' warnings in auto-compilation.
>     * module/ice-9/boot-9.scm (%auto-compilation-options): Add
>       `duplicate-case-datum' and `bad-case-datum'.
> commit 5cd10307866e6e6c44cb46b366f71d4118fa6aed
> Author: Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden>
> Date:   Fri Nov 23 23:56:01 2012 +0100
>     Add tests for `-Wduplicate-case-datum' and `-Wbad-case-datum'.
>     * test-suite/tests/tree-il.test (%opts-w-duplicate-case-datum,
>       %opts-w-bad-case-datum): New variables.
>       ("warnings")["duplicate-case-datum", "bad-case-datum"]: New tests.
> commit 679a35567dbb0a467e99f19d3f513fac28317f26
> Author: Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden>
> Date:   Fri Nov 23 23:41:32 2012 +0100
>     doc: Mention the `duplicate-case-datum' and `bad-case-datum' warnings.
>     * doc/ref/api-evaluation.texi (Compilation): List the
>       `duplicate-case-datum' and `bad-case-datum' warnings.

Sorry for not noticing this earlier, but I should mention that although
I use some of the warnings infrastructure for reporting the
'duplicate-case-datum' and 'bad-case-datum' warnings, I never check for
those warning flags.  The warnings are reported unconditionally.

I had started to work on a patch set to make them conditional, but that
work was halted due to an unresolved disagreement about how warnings
should be specified.

I felt, and continue to strongly feel, that we should not require the
user to provide a complete list of warning types that they want.  If we
do that, then users will be forced to hard-code that list into their
build systems (and/or code that uses 'compile').  If they do this, then
whenever we add a new warning type, no one will see the new warnings
until they modify their build system.

Can we revisit this issue?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]