On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Sam Panzer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Here is one other question: With this patch, incorrectly passing an > std::string to printf generates an error (can't pass non-POD member), a > warning (printf format doesn't match), and a note (the c_str() suggestion). > Is this the behavior we want? I don't think so... Ideally: 1) If we are about to issue a an error (non-POD object passed through printf), check whether the non-POD object has a 'c_str()' method that returns a type which matches the format specifier. If so, use a specific diagnostic message for the error, attach a fixit-hint suggesting '.c_str()', and continue parsing as-if the user had done that. 2) If there is no error (passing a std::string* perhaps), then in the warning message, give a more precise message than 'cannot convert std::string* to const char*' or whatever by checking if there is a c_str() method that matches the type of the printf. One thing I would encourage you to do: don't base this on 'std::string'. I actually think the error/warning should fire for any class type with a c_str method that returns a viable type. That way non-standard string libraries will get the same benefit if they conform the the same conceptual interface as the standard string library.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
