On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 20:00, Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote: > 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?
I agree that a good warning about non-portable code, that could be turned on by default or as part of -Wall, would be the ideal. However, we're not there yet. In the meantime, I think having a warning under -pedantic that warns about non-ISO C format strings makes sense. I agree that it would be extremely annoying to warn about POSIX extensions by default, but under -pedantic I think users would expect to get warnings about these, just as with GCC. Maybe the wording of the warnings and the name of the flag could be changed to make this intention more clear. I agree that just saying "non-standard" is a bit vague in the light of some of these features actually being standardized under POSIX. - Hans _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
