On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 21:02 +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 09:56:59PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 12:52 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > > > > > hmmmm are there any platforms where unsigned long long is > 64 bits? > > > > (and yes it would be nice if there was a u64 printf flag ;) > > > > > > Adding a new printf flag is technically _trivial_. > > > > > > The problem is getting gcc not to warn about it every time it sees it > > > (while not losing the gcc format string checking entirely). Do newer > > > gcc's > > > allow some way of saying "this flag takes this type" for extended format > > > definitions? > > > > afaics there is none... even if there was a "just don't warn about this > > one" would be nice.. but I don't see that either. > > -Wformat is what enables those, so we can turn them all off.
sure it's all or nothing. not "all but the u64 one"
_______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
