https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100431
--- Comment #5 from Joey Dumont ---
I just started looking at these other cases (for some reason I didn't see them
in my initial compilation), but I am not sure what format specifiers should be
used. Are the format specifiers used by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100431
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
%< and %> are GCC diagnostics format specifiers, not printf.
They are more similar to e.g. GNU printf %m , something that doesn't take any
va_arg, but is interpreted.
Try
printf ("%m\n");
vs.
printf ("%s",
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100431
--- Comment #3 from Joey Dumont ---
I had tested with a simple printf:
#include
#ifndef N_
# define N_(msgid) msgid
#endif
int
main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
printf(N_("use of C++23 % integer constant"));
printf(N_("use of C++23 %%>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100431
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100431
--- Comment #1 from Joey Dumont ---
Created attachment 50758
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50758=edit
Workaround for -Wno-format flag injected during build process.
