After getting in contact with clang's ml, the determined that this a bug in
clang's format checker.
Note that this bug affects:
printf(%hu\n, ntohs(x));
This happens in 9 that ntohs is defined as a macro using conditinal operator
(? :)
The discussion is here:
It doesnt warn here. Can you check with clang -E what the ntohs()
is being expanded to and what the real prototype is?
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 06:35:18PM -0600, Axel Gonzalez wrote:
I'm getting an strange warning whem compiling with clang (from base) on RC1.
This warning doesn't appear with
Here is the output (short version):
...
(snip)
static __inline __uint16_t
__bswap16_var(__uint16_t _x)
{
return ((__uint16_t)((_x) 8 | (_x) 8));
}
...
(snip)
int main()
{
uint16_t x = (__builtin_constant_p(80) ? (__uint16_t)(((__uint16_t)(80)) 8
| ((__uint16_t)(80)) 8) :
I'm getting an strange warning whem compiling with clang (from base) on RC1.
This warning doesn't appear with 8.X and clang from ports.
The warning is strange because ntohs is not int:
uint16_t
ntohs(uint16_t netshort);
Any insight would be appreciated, thanks in advance!
A
%
