<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Jun 13, 2012, at 1:24 PM, Richard Smith wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Chandler Carruth <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:chandlerc@google.com" target="_blank">chandlerc@google.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex; position: static; z-index: auto; ">
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">But you didn't test the interaction of '--pedantic' and '--no-pedantic', much less '--pedantic' and '-no-pedantic' or '-pedantic' and '--no-pedantic'. =7</div></blockquote></div><br><div>Less =7ly, it looks like -pedantic-errors -no-pedantic will still produce -pedantic errors. Is that what we want? I would have expected -pedantic, -pedantic-errors, -no-pedantic to work analogously to -Wpedantic, -Werror=pedantic, -Wno-pedantic.</div>
</blockquote></div><br><div>Mmm, yes, I can see this. I'm going to hold off for a bit because we're discussing how this should work with -Weverything; we may want to change how we model -pedantic to be a warning flag with some extra semantics.</div><div><br></div><div>John.</div></body></html>