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).

  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: link
Be 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).