-wi on default?

[Pierre LeMoine]

On Tuesday, 8 May 2012 at 04:32:14 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> ...
> I'm _very_ much against having normal warnings which are things 
> which don't
> definitively need to be fixed, because otherwise you get into 
> the situation
> where people ignore them, and the quality of the software 
> suffers, because you
> get a ton of warnings that don't get fixed, some of which 
> _need_ to get fixed
> and others which just hide those warnings by helping to make 
> the number of
> warnings too many to examine. Optional flags for additional 
> warnings don't
> introduce quite the same problem (though obviously if you 
> always insist on
> them for your builds, you risk the same problems as if they 
> were part of -wi).
> ...

If that's a problem, then why not add a parameter which says how 
many warnings to tolerate before treating them (all the errors up 
to this point) as an error, and make the default value for this 
parameter relatively strict? I'm sure i've seen this 
functionality in other compilers/tools.

/Pierre