On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 4:15 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 23 April 2012 05:20, Jeffrey Walton wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> http://www.gnu.org/software/gsl/manual/html_node/GCC-warning-options-for-numerical-programs.html >> recommends the following: >> >> gcc -ansi -pedantic -Werror -Wall -W >> -Wmissing-prototypes -Wstrict-prototypes >> -Wconversion -Wshadow -Wpointer-arith >> -Wcast-qual -Wcast-align >> -Wwrite-strings -Wnested-externs >> -fshort-enums -fno-common -Dinline= -g -O2 >> >> Is it possible to efficiently tell which of the above options are not >> included with -Wall -Wextra? > > There are only nine of them, look them up in the manual and see if it > says "This option is enabled by -Wall" > >> Wouldn't -Weverything be easier on folks who really want to know about >> all errata? Its a helpful Clang switch. > > The switches above are not all warnings, a -Weverything would turn on > a lot more and increase the number of false positives. I don't think you give GCC and its static analysis capabilities enough credit. Denying folks based on your personal taste is causing more harm than good (with all do repsect). The Ostrich Algorithm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostrich_algorithm) is worse, in my humble opinion. If you don't want to know about potential problems, you don't have to use -Weverything (or -Wall -Wextra). Folks who are interested in all potential problems could use it (if available). Jeff
