https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
Andrew Miloradovsky changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Miloradovsky from comment #4)
> Hmm, man printf(3) doesn't tell anything about the formats, what are they
> for?
They are part of the gcc diagnostic format. Gcc does not use printf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Miloradovsky ---
After all I might simply insert that comment everywhere, to reduce confusion.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Miloradovsky ---
Hmm, man printf(3) doesn't tell anything about the formats, what are they for?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Still broken:
else
-error (gmsgid);
+error ("%s", gmsgid);
And more where you have *msgid.
I bet invalid_func_diag has similar too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
Andrew Miloradovsky changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41428|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This patch is incorrect:
/* The gmsgid may be a format string with %< and %>. */
- warned = pedwarn (exploc, opt, gmsgid);
+ warned = pedwarn (exploc, opt, "%s", gmsgid);
See that comment of why.
