On Feb 27, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Hans Wennborg <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 16:54, Joerg Sonnenberger > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 03:09:05PM +0000, Hans Wennborg wrote: >>> The attached patch makes -Wformat-non-standard warn about the use of >>> positional arguments (e.g. "%3$d") in format strings. (pr12017) >> >> It sounds wrong to use -Wformat-non-standard for those, since they are >> covered by POSIX. > > Looking at > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/printf.html, > it seems that so are the 'S' and 'C' conversion specifiers. > > Do you have a better name suggestion for the flag? > > The intention was that it should mean "non-standard" as in "non ISO C > standard". For me the goal of the warning is to warn about non-portable code, not annoy people. Format specifiers and format string extensions covered by POSIX are by definition portable on POSIX-compliant systems. So I raise the question of whether or not we should warn about these at all?
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
