public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/45780] Warning for arithmetic operations involving C99 _Bool variable
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 02:29:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-45780-4-oQ0qN8W7fV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-45780-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45780

--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager <egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu> ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #3)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2)
> > The -Wc90-c99-compat that made it into gcc5 currently warns about
> > any usage of bool whatsoever, not just the specific usages of bool
> > listed in this bug...
> 
> Right, that was the point of it.

...so is this bug worth keeping open then? It'd seem kinda redundant to me for
extra, more-specific warnings about bools to be placed in -Wc90-c99-compat (as
was originally proposed), when the flag already prints the more-generalized
warnings that it currently does. Or would they get their own separate
-Wbool-arith option? If so, what would happen when a user specifies both a
hypothetical -Wbool-arith flag along with -Wc90-c99-compat at the same time?
I'm just kinda worried that such a situation could lead to duplicated and/or
excessive warnings...


      parent reply	other threads:[~2015-05-29  2:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-24 18:40 [Bug c/45780] New: " ubizjak at gmail dot com
2010-09-24 19:06 ` [Bug c/45780] " ubizjak at gmail dot com
2010-11-03 20:05 ` ericb at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-05-28 18:54 ` egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
2015-05-29  2:29 ` egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu [this message]

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-45780-4-oQ0qN8W7fV@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).