Re: gcc-3.3 issues

Peter Kadau <peter.kadau_at_tuebingen.mpg.de> writes:

> Hi !
> 
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning%20Options
> 
> Hmm, that's exactly as in the info page.
> 
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3/gcc/C---Dialect-Options.html#C++%20Dialect%20Options
> 
> > and search for permissive, to see the condition Alexander speaks of.
> 
> Well, here it is:
> -fpermissive
>         Downgrade messages about nonconformant code from errors to
>         warnings. By default, G++ effectively sets -pedantic-errors
>         without -pedantic; this option reverses that. This behavior and
>         this option are superseded by -pedantic, which works as it does
>         for GNU C.

On second reading, I'm not sure I understand it either. (And I am
    a native speaker. :-)

>         
> I admit, I'm not a native speaker, so please correct me.
> Doesn't that mean, if you don't specify any pedantic, it defaults
> to -pedantic-errors for C++, but if you specify -pedantic, you don't
> get errors for warnings like it should be... ??

Specifying -pedantic doesn't turn errors into warnings for
    g++. I don't think the phrase 'this option reverses that' is 
    intended to mean g++ swaps the meaning of -pendantic and
    -pendantic-errors; I think it is intended to mean -fpermissive
    downgrades many errors into warnings.