public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/60304] Including <atomic> disables -Wconversion-null
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 12:01:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-60304-4-vm264e2waC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-60304-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60304
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #9)
> however, we do not do it in the case of 'false' (because we do not think it
> should be a macro, but it actually is). Perhaps we should do it, is there a
> downside to it?
The C++ standard explicitly forbids false from being a macro, it's a bug in
stdbool.h and IMHO the front-end should not be changed to accommodate the bug.
>From gcc-bugs-return-464917-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Oct 24 12:01:06 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-464917-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 997 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2014 12:01:06 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 926 invoked by uid 48); 24 Oct 2014 12:00:59 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/60304] Including <atomic> disables -Wconversion-null
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 12:09:00 -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: 4.8.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-60304-4-VD2WUqGg9B@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-60304-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-60304-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg01938.txt.bz2
Content-length: 573
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id`304
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
But the C standard requires that it is a macro. So, shouldn't just <cstdbool>
#undef false and #undef true, or does C++ behave a particular behavior also for
a header it doesn't own (stdbool.h)?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-24 11:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-21 15:59 [Bug preprocessor/60304] New: " bug-reports at psdtechnologies dot com
2014-02-21 18:24 ` [Bug preprocessor/60304] " harald at gigawatt dot nl
2014-10-24 9:05 ` [Bug c++/60304] " paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2014-10-24 9:29 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2014-10-24 9:35 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-24 9:44 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2014-10-24 9:51 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-24 11:33 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2014-10-24 12:01 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2014-10-24 12:27 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-24 13:19 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-24 13:23 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-24 13:49 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-24 14:51 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-24 16:20 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-02 15:32 ` [Bug c++/60304] Including <stdbool.h> disables -Wconversion-null in C++ 98 mode redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-02 15:58 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-02 16:03 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-02 19:50 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-02 19:52 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-05 11:13 ` harald at gigawatt dot nl
2020-09-05 12:12 ` redi 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-60304-4-vm264e2waC@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).