public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/114526] ISO C does not prohibit extensions: fix misconception. Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2024 16:04:32 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-114526-4-hVOx3NyHYU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-114526-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114526 --- Comment #8 from Joseph S. Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> --- "rejects", in the ISO C sense, only applies to errors and pedwarns in GCC; not to warnings conditional on -pedantic (of which there are also some, but which don't turn into errors with -pedantic). If you have cases where something that is only *undefined as a property of a particular execution of the program* (as opposed to undefined as a property of a translation unit or of the collection of translation units making up a program, or violating a Constraint or syntax rule) but that are errors or pedwarns, those should be reported as separate bugs. There are various cases where we make sure to only warn at compilation time and generate code that aborts at precisely the point in execution where undefined behavior would occur, precisely because the undefined behavior in those cases is a property of a program execution. I believe conversions between function and object pointers are undefined as a property of the translation unit - not of a particular execution. Whereas e.g. calling a function pointer converted to an incompatible type is undefined as a property of a particular execution (the undefinedness only occurring when the call itself is executed, after all side effects from the function designator and arguments have taken place).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-02 16:04 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2024-03-28 22:00 [Bug c/114526] New: " kkylheku at gmail dot com 2024-03-28 22:03 ` [Bug c/114526] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-28 22:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-28 22:33 ` kkylheku at gmail dot com 2024-03-29 0:27 ` harald at gigawatt dot nl 2024-03-29 1:20 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-29 1:23 ` harald at gigawatt dot nl 2024-03-29 3:07 ` kkylheku at gmail dot com 2024-04-02 16:04 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2024-04-02 16:16 ` harald at gigawatt dot nl 2024-04-02 16:20 ` harald at gigawatt dot nl 2024-04-02 17:21 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-02 17:29 ` kkylheku at gmail dot com 2024-04-02 17:35 ` kkylheku at gmail dot com 2024-04-02 17:57 ` harald at gigawatt dot nl 2024-04-02 18:18 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-02 19:06 ` harald at gigawatt dot nl 2024-04-02 19:41 ` kkylheku at gmail dot com 2024-04-02 21:37 ` harald at gigawatt dot nl 2024-04-03 5:48 ` kkylheku at gmail dot com 2024-04-03 8:07 ` harald at gigawatt dot nl
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-114526-4-hVOx3NyHYU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).