| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f |
| Date: | Sat, 06 Apr 2002 20:05:14 +0300 |
| From: | "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
| Sender: | halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il |
| To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| Message-Id: | <9003-Sat06Apr2002200514+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> |
| X-Mailer: | emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 |
| In-reply-to: | <200204061153.g36Br0M25451@speedy.ludd.luth.se> |
| (nobody AT delorie DOT com) | |
| Subject: | Re: gcc-l.opt |
| References: | <200204061153 DOT g36Br0M25451 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se> |
| Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> From: nobody AT delorie DOT com > Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 13:53:00 +0200 (CEST) > > I haven't either yes or no to my proposal to add the same warnings to > gcc-l.opt as gcc.opt, so I'll add them. And if you are unhappy, we'll > remove them after some time. IMHO, it doesn't make sense to turn on warnings if we don't intend to do anything about the code they flag. So I don't think these warnings should be turned one before we fix the offending code fragments.
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |