From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D25C0BC75 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:17:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j1EHH5to024954 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:17:05 +0100 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA22452 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:17:05 +0100 (MET) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (yquem.inria.fr [128.93.8.37]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j1EHH4GS024951 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:17:05 +0100 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) In-Reply-To: <1108082923.16698.184.camel@pelican.wigram> References: <1108082923.16698.184.camel@pelican.wigram> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Damien Doligez Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Warning options Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:17:08 +0100 To: caml-list X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619.2) X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4210DD11.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4210DD10.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; damien:01 damien:01 caml-list:01 wrote:01 ocaml:01 gcc:01 silently:01 flags:01 flags:01 48,:98 wwww:98 doligez:01 doligez:01 disables:02 compiling:02 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Feb 11, 2005, at 01:48, skaller wrote: > Ocaml appears to be following the same path as gcc with > respect to warnings: if a warning option isn't recognized > it is reported as a hard error. > > This feature creates an unnecessary upwards compatibility > barrier, and I request the INRIA team consider fixing it. > The correct strategy is to generate a warning, but > continue compiling anyhow. You're right, I will remove the check and silently ignore the bad warning flags. > (d) I put -w y to disable the warning In the meantime, you can use "-w aCDFMPSUVX" to disable the Y warning in a compatible way. Not very elegant, but it should work. > or provide a new warning like -w W w which disables/enables > the warning about bad warning flags depending on the > default (kind of complex ..) I don't think we want to go that far. -- Damien