https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.2.0, 7.3.0, 8.2.0, 9.1.0
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:71ad0b5dde449ee1f6b755a99f5c52152e375835
commit r11-3239-g71ad0b5dde449ee1f6b755a99f5c52152e375835
Author: Martin Sebor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
The following nonsensical declaration is also not diagnosed:
void __attribute__ ((alloc_align (1))) f (void*);
The attribute handler should check that the referenced argument has integer
type and that the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> But what is specifying multiple declarations of the same function with
> different sets of attributes supposed to mean? Is it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
They sure are! (We should document it.)
But what is specifying multiple declarations of the same function with
different sets of attributes supposed to mean? Is it supposed to apply the
union of all of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Multiple format attributes for the same function, naming different
arguments as a format string, are perfectly valid; they mean the function
uses multiple format strings (each of which has
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Attribute format suffers from a similar problem.
(I'm not looking for ways to break things, btw., but rather trying to come up
with a test to exercise my patch for bug 78673 in whose review Jeff pointed out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
And nonnull, sentinel, destructor, constructor too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78666
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
13 matches
Mail list logo
