From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id BCCB83858430; Thu, 18 May 2023 16:01:50 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BCCB83858430
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1684425710;
	bh=QLv8fARaNYlT5vIObMbOVGi+20SoFDc72dlB9DjdSUM=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=mUPQBo04NTKl4W4zIyo/H8vJ3NLQLGxVVGYJIs6Uef3pAKB9QNnPASJsGC5rGBwCr
	 2D+lb89zYcfi07/FQjUO9w/6JYjlZeUvFNRPiMfqPr4xC3W2gIEMMIhXXjry3EaNW2
	 0A4xOSGS7yNIcY92UJ/AJwDXal28MKxLVbaeHYHc=
From: "xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/109891] Null pointer special handling in ostream's
 operator << for C-strings
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 16:01:50 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: xry111 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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-109891-4-f6RVcPJgc0@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109891-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109891-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109891

Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #8 from Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7)
> Oops, if I'd typed PEDASSERT not PEDANTIC, it would be a deliberate choice
> ;-)
>=20
> Yes, I think PEDASSERT fits better, based on the documented meaning of it
> (which even mentions the std::string((const char*)nullptr) case):
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/debug_mode_semantics.html

Ccan we add a "pednonnull" attribute or something to produce a -Wnonnull
warning like the nonnull attribute but w/o affecting code generation as wel=
l?=20
I remember we've discussed "adding nonnull attribute for
basic_ostream::operator<<" and the idea was rejected because the nonnull
attribute would throw away the null pointer check.=