public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/114780] Using C23 nullptr as sentinel gives missing sentinel warning Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2024 04:09:50 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-114780-4-rVphtxwmdc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-114780-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114780 --- Comment #4 from GCC Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek <jakub@gcc.gnu.org>: https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e802786436851b1f5efca21a14d4f41c83c83f4f commit r13-8637-ge802786436851b1f5efca21a14d4f41c83c83f4f Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> Date: Sat Apr 20 00:12:36 2024 +0200 c-family: Allow arguments with NULLPTR_TYPE as sentinels [PR114780] While in C++ the ellipsis argument conversions include "An argument that has type cv std::nullptr_t is converted to type void*" in C23 a nullptr_t argument is not promoted in any way, but va_arg description says: "the type of the next argument is nullptr_t and type is a pointer type that has the same representation and alignment requirements as a pointer to a character type." So, while in C++ check_function_sentinel will never see NULLPTR_TYPE, for C23 it can see that and currently we incorrectly warn about those. The only question is whether we should warn on any argument with nullptr_t type or just about nullptr (nullptr_t argument with integer_zerop value). Through undefined behavior guess one could pass non-NULL pointer that way, say by union { void *p; nullptr_t q; } u; u.p = &whatever; and pass u.q to ..., but valid code should always pass something that will read as (char *) 0 when read using va_arg (ap, char *), so I think it is better not to warn rather than warn in those cases. Note, clang seems to pass (void *)0 rather than expression of nullptr_t type to ellipsis in C23 mode as if it did the C++ ellipsis argument conversions, in that case guess not warning about that would be even safer, but what GCC does I think follows the spec more closely, even when in a valid program one shouldn't be able to observe the difference. 2024-04-20 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> PR c/114780 * c-common.cc (check_function_sentinel): Allow as sentinel any argument of NULLPTR_TYPE. * gcc.dg/format/sentinel-2.c: New test. (cherry picked from commit 2afdecccbaf5c5b1c7a235509b37092540906c02)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-21 4:09 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2024-04-19 9:58 [Bug c/114780] New: " cazfi74 at gmail dot com 2024-04-19 11:10 ` [Bug c/114780] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-19 22:13 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-19 22:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-21 4:09 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2024-04-23 6:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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-114780-4-rVphtxwmdc@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).