Re: Is it time to take the middle-end stringop/array warnings out of -Wall?

Am 20.05.26 um 18:31 schrieb Joseph Myers via Gcc:
> On Wed, 20 May 2026, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> 
>> I'm OK with that that though moving the diagnostics earlier might be another
>> option.  But once they are no longer in -Wall I fear nobody will enable them
>> and so we can as well eliminate the then unused (and actually unmaintained
>> for large parts) code ...
> 
> You could put them in -Wextra.  -Wall is supposed to be "all the warnings

IMO that would just make -Wextra much less useful.  When stringop/array
still produce such many false positive warnings, that would just shift
the issue to a less prominent place, keeping the annoyances (both for
the users and for the maintainers due to bug reports etc.)

My experience with these options is that they are very time consuming.
The time needed to track them down, just to reveal that they are
just false positives is annoying.  And the time to roll test cases for PRs.

Johann

> about constructions that some users consider questionable, and that are
> easy to avoid (or modify to prevent the warning), even in conjunction with
> macros", while -Wextra includes some warnings for "constructions that are
> necessary or hard to avoid in some cases, and there is no simple way to
> modify the code to suppress the warning" (which seems like a reasonable
> match for the issues with false positives for these warnings).