https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
--- Comment #24 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #23)
> I also suspect many of these new warnings we are doing in recent years
> really should not be part of -Wall because of how many false positives we
> have.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
--- Comment #23 from Andrew Pinski ---
The patch which would have "fixed" this was reverted as there was too many
false positives and that happens when you do optimization based warnings ...
I don't know if we want to keep this open or close
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 95515 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
--- Comment #19 from Segher Boessenkool ---
powerpc64-linux, even.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
--- Comment #16 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Dec 14 17:23:16 2016
New Revision: 243661
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243661=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c/78673 - sprintf missing attribute nonnull on destination argument
PR c/17308
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #15 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
frankhb1989 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||frankhb1989 at gmail dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
--- Comment #8 from Eric Blake ericb at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-25 19:31:59
UTC ---
I hit this again today, and I'm still upset that gcc is doing such a poor job
with (not) using this attribute as a way to improve code quality via decent
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-25
20:00:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Even if you decide that you are unable to warn about a call to foo(var)
because
the only way to analyze that var might be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Eric Blake ericb at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ericb at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
--- Comment #5 from msebor at gmail dot com 2010-02-15 20:51 ---
I second Ulrich's request.
Besides nonnull, this enhancement would be useful in attribute printf
as well. For example, in the program below, both calls to printf() have
undefined behavior in C99 and should be diagnosed:
--- Comment #4 from thutt at vmware dot com 2008-12-23 15:40 ---
/*
I concur with Ulrich, but three years on, using gcc 4.1.2.
Although a parameter which is marked with the 'nonnull' attribute
is demonstrably nonnull, and although the compiler recognizes it is
specifically
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-25 20:52 ---
*** Bug 30043 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-24
23:13 ---
*** Bug 22179 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Last reconfirmed|2004-09-09 03:42:31 |2004-12-09 00:17:09
date|
24 matches
Mail list logo
