* Doubt regarding the PR92209
@ 2022-03-04 19:33 Krishna Narayanan
2022-03-04 19:48 ` Xi Ruoyao
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Krishna Narayanan @ 2022-03-04 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-help
Hello,
I am working on this issue(PR92209) and had a query concerning it,for
this PR I have done by making the required change in text rather than
a fix-it diagnostic.Either of the two should be fine right?
Thanks,
Krishna Narayanan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Doubt regarding the PR92209
2022-03-04 19:33 Doubt regarding the PR92209 Krishna Narayanan
@ 2022-03-04 19:48 ` Xi Ruoyao
2022-03-05 13:50 ` Krishna Narayanan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Xi Ruoyao @ 2022-03-04 19:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krishna Narayanan, gcc-help
On Sat, 2022-03-05 at 01:03 +0530, Krishna Narayanan via Gcc-help wrote:
> Hello,
> I am working on this issue(PR92209) and had a query concerning it,for
> this PR I have done by making the required change in text rather than
> a fix-it diagnostic. Either of the two should be fine right?
TL;DR gcc-help is not an ideal place to discuss this. You can send your
patch to gcc-patches to get a review, or leave a comment in the bugzilla
for discussion.
If you only change the text, it will be:
t.c:1:1: warning: a function prototype must specify the argument types [-Wstrict-prototypes]
1 | static int f();
| ^~~~~~
To me it is even worse than what we have now:
t.c:1:1: warning: function declaration isn't a prototype [-Wstrict-prototypes]
1 | static int f();
| ^~~~~~
--
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@mengyan1223.wang>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: Doubt regarding the PR92209
2022-03-04 19:48 ` Xi Ruoyao
@ 2022-03-05 13:50 ` Krishna Narayanan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Krishna Narayanan @ 2022-03-05 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xi Ruoyao; +Cc: gcc-help
On Sat, Mar 5, 2022 at 1:18 AM Xi Ruoyao <xry111@mengyan1223.wang> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2022-03-05 at 01:03 +0530, Krishna Narayanan via Gcc-help wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I am working on this issue(PR92209) and had a query concerning it,for
> > this PR I have done by making the required change in text rather than
> > a fix-it diagnostic. Either of the two should be fine right?
>
> TL;DR gcc-help is not an ideal place to discuss this. You can send your
> patch to gcc-patches to get a review, or leave a comment in the bugzilla
> for discussion.
Yes I will submit it as a patch to gcc-patches and ask for a review over there.
Thanks,
Krishna.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-03-05 13:50 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-03-04 19:33 Doubt regarding the PR92209 Krishna Narayanan
2022-03-04 19:48 ` Xi Ruoyao
2022-03-05 13:50 ` Krishna Narayanan
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).