[m-rev.] for post-commit review and opinions: warn option classification

[Julien Fischer]

On Mon, 19 May 2025 at 16:54, Zoltan Somogyi <zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 May 2025 16:39:56 +1000, Peter Wang <novalazy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 May 2025 16:39:03 +1000 Peter Wang <novalazy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 19 May 2025 16:33:05 +1000 Julien Fischer <jfischer at opturion.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We can abbreviate a little
> > > >
> > > >    oc_warn_ctrl
> > > >    oc_warn_correct
> > > >    oc_warn_style
> > > >    oc_inform
> > > >
> > > > Even though oc_warn_correct is now the longest of the option_categroy
> > > > constructors,
> > > > it's now only by one letter.  (I'm tempted to rename oc_warn_correct
> > > > to oc_warn_dodgy ...)
> > >
> > > oc_warn_suspect?
> >
> > Or indeed, "sus".
>
> I am fine with any of oc_sus, oc_dodgy and oc_corr (short for correctness).
> Whatever you pick, I will change to, *after* the diff I just posted for review
> is committed (to avoid a conflict).
>
> Does anyone object to replacing the existing functions that return the list
> of style and nonstyle options, which have proven to be incomplete
> with a call to solutions using the new subcategories? The only user visible
> effect would be that fixing that incompleteness will turn off more warnings
> in cases where we turn off either just style warnings, or "all" warnings
> (which previously left some on.)

I have no objection.

> And does anyone object to turning off warnings when creating .*opt files?

Again, no objection from me.

Julien.