This is the mail archive of the gdb@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: A strange gcc behavior, and an argument against -Wno-unused

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
To: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: gdb at sourceware dot org, dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com, msnyder at vmware dot com
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:10:36 +0200
Subject: Re: A strange gcc behavior, and an argument against -Wno-unused
References: <4ACFD8B7.4090902@vmware.com> <4ACFF3C7.3030802@gmail.com> <200910101745.27358.pedro@codesourcery.com>
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>

> From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:45:26 +0100
> Cc: Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com>,  Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
> 
> On Saturday 10 October 2009 03:39:03, Dave Korn wrote:
> 
> >  Or append "-Wunused-value"?
> 
> Sounds like a good first step to me.

What version of GCC introduced this switch?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: A strange gcc behavior, and an argument against -Wno-unused
  - From: Pedro Alves
- Re: A strange gcc behavior, and an argument against -Wno-unused
  - From: Tom Tromey

References:
- A strange gcc behavior, and an argument against -Wno-unused
  - From: Michael Snyder
- Re: A strange gcc behavior, and an argument against -Wno-unused
  - From: Dave Korn
- Re: A strange gcc behavior, and an argument against -Wno-unused
  - From: Pedro Alves

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]