From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 9D0803857836; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 09:48:57 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9D0803857836 From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/106111] New: -Wc++20-compat doesn't warn about using `requires` as an identifier Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 09:48:57 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status keywords bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 09:48:57 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D106111 Bug ID: 106111 Summary: -Wc++20-compat doesn't warn about using `requires` as an identifier Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: redi at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- int requires; Clang warns about this: r.C:1:5: warning: 'requires' is a keyword in C++20 [-Wc++20-compat] int requires; ^ 1 warning generated. GCC should do too. I wonder if we should warn about this by default (and suppress it if -Wno-c++20-compat is used). A keyword that is a common English word (unlike decltype, constexpr etc.) deserves a pretty big warning about compat with n= ewer standards.=