From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 01CA23858D39; Fri, 29 Mar 2024 01:20:16 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 01CA23858D39 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1711675217; bh=r3NmCVx5gXz7AMRpkvoBuxNsvStjP2eXk9cMUgKMGG8=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=QIr4ZvYQB3SuU15Crc0/tadvnfTn9flhw2ogmi2ZPzwAJuKQfGxudw/2opwzu4oUS 5q2c9JZ8+5QCdwaN8w3+y8eoyCJ4J5DHlm8jiB6FHYJSsf7Bv3TBEXFjcZf0pKyw+V M4Fm6Mm6EfPB9vsdBCt3D3vcB0+y/cSY2gUpOkLY= From: "jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/114526] ISO C does not prohibit extensions: fix misconception. Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 01:20:16 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: DUPLICATE 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: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D114526 --- Comment #5 from Joseph S. Myers --- The -pedantic documentation was updated to reflect reality - that the optio= n is about more than just when diagnostics are required by ISO C ("forbidden extensions" can be taken, in the C case, as meaning those that involve constraint violations or are outside the standard C syntax) but covers some other programs doing things not defined in ISO C as well - in commit 074e95e34275d72664f997ed949d9c91e37cd6ee (July 2000). I don't think any possible narrower intent there may have been long before then is particular= ly relevant now. It may well be the case that for certain diagnostics for things that do not violate constraints or syntax rules, "ISO C does not define" or "is a GNU extension" or similar would be better wording.=