Sam James <s...@gentoo.org> writes: > From: Joseph Myers <josmy...@redhat.com> > > As reported in bug 112556, GCC wrongly rejects conversion of null > pointer constants with bool or enum type to pointers in > convert_for_assignment (assignment, initialization, argument passing, > return). Fix the code there to allow BOOLEAN_TYPE and ENUMERAL_TYPE; > it already allowed INTEGER_TYPE and BITINT_TYPE. > > This bug (together with -std=gnu23 meaning false has type bool rather > than int) has in turn resulted in people thinking they need to fix > code using false as a null pointer constant for C23 compatibility. > While such a usage is certainly questionable, it has nothing to do > with C23 compatibility and the right place for warnings about such > usage is -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant. I think it would be > appropriate to extend -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant to cover > BOOLEAN_TYPE, ENUMERAL_TYPE and BITINT_TYPE (in all the various > contexts in which that option generates warnings), though this patch > doesn't do anything about that option. > > Bootstrapped with no regressions for x86-64-pc-linux-gnu. > > PR c/112556 > > gcc/c/ > * c-typeck.cc (convert_for_assignment): Allow conversion of > ENUMERAL_TYPE and BOOLEAN_TYPE null pointer constants to pointers. > > gcc/testsuite/ > * gcc.dg/c11-null-pointer-constant-1.c, > gcc.dg/c23-null-pointer-constant-1.c: New tests. > > (cherry picked from commit 3d525fce70fa0ffa0b22af6e213643e1ceca5ab5) > --- > As discussed on the PR, I feel like this is worth having for 14 as we're > asking upstreams to try reproduce issues w/ -std=gnu23 (or -std=c23) if > they don't have access to GCC 15, and this bug may lead to them being > confused. > > Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with no regressions. > > OK?
Ping, as 14 RC is tomorrow.
