From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 884053858C2C; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 17:46:20 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 884053858C2C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1674063980; bh=q/auRPjShvuGBiGFEUChu9i8UMsth/EG3P5oDNUya3w=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=sqn2h8kT+HQwbh/Du+ylC1V1UDtLxxp8Shu76D5olOq4oivPdexQXTD0wqg4jCtKw RPo9OSxE0Hvr/2JzPMOZ1Y+X31OQBq9FrLboIyOj20DNSZezfAFX9lalxYZxTUOJsz R1Zwr85X8x2uOpZNvGrdth6SPhA9uL/pf+UJ7SaM= From: "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/47781] warnings from custom printf format specifiers Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 17:46:19 +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: 4.4.5 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: manu at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 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=3D47781 --- Comment #30 from Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez --- (In reply to joseph@codesourcery.com from comment #29) > As I said before, the issue is still how to define something general=20 > enough to be useful but that doesn't expose too much of the details of=20 > GCC's internal data structures for format checking. Indeed, the first step does not even require looking at GCC code or an implementation, but coming up with a design that is flexible enough to be useful.=