> Date: Sat, 27 May 2017 13:33:25 +0200 > From: walter harms <wha...@bfs.de> > > Am 27.05.2017 11:02, schrieb Matthieu Herrb: > > Hi, > > > > Marc Espie recently found out that the X_NONNULL macro in Xfuncproto.h > > is generating spurious warnings when included in C++ code build with > > clang++ -std=c++11. > > > > Other OpenBSD developper tried to find uses of the macro in the wild > > and didn't find any, even in the X.Org lib app or xserver tree. > > > > So, should this macro definition be removed alltogether (acking that > > no-one cares to use it) or just apply the patch below ? > > > > From 6ae956660879d70e078025c3d8f1ac3fd438cad2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Marc Espie <es...@nerim.net> > > Date: Sat, 27 May 2017 10:55:04 +0200 > > Subject: [PATCH] Fix compiling any C++ code including Xfuncproto.h with > > clang++ -std=c++11 > > > > It shouldn't warn, bu it will use the "legacy" varargs macros and whine. > > --- > > Xfuncproto.h.in | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Xfuncproto.h.in b/Xfuncproto.h.in > > index b88493d..1be3f55 100644 > > --- a/Xfuncproto.h.in > > +++ b/Xfuncproto.h.in > > @@ -166,7 +166,8 @@ in this Software without prior written authorization > > from The Open Group. > > argument macros, must be only used inside #ifdef _X_NONNULL guards, as > > many legacy X clients are compiled in C89 mode still. */ > > #if __has_attribute(nonnull) \ > > - && defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && (__STDC_VERSION__ - 0 >= 199901L) /* > > C99 */ > > + && (defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && (__STDC_VERSION__ - 0 >= 199901L) \ > > + || (defined(__cplusplus) && (__cplusplus - 0 >= 201103L))) /* C99 > > C++11 */ > > #define _X_NONNULL(...) __attribute__((nonnull(__VA_ARGS__))) > > #elif __has_attribute(nonnull) \ > > || defined(__GNUC__) && ((__GNUC__ * 100 + __GNUC_MINOR__) >= 303) > > > > > > > > So far i understand this is a problem with clang++. "spurious > warning" sounds for me more like a compiler bug (assuming that gcc > has no problems with that). So why not make that a NOOP until fixed > in clang ?
GCC 4.9.4 warns as well: $ g++ -pedantic -std=c++11 -I/usr/X11R6/include xfunc.cc In file included from xfunc.cc:1:0: /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xfuncproto.h:173:24: warning: ISO C does not permit named variadic macros [-Wvariadic-macros] #define _X_NONNULL(args...) __attribute__((nonnull(args))) _______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel