From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from resdmta-h1p-028597.sys.comcast.net (resdmta-h1p-028597.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fd02:2446::d]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 877E23858CDB for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 19:32:37 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 877E23858CDB Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=comcast.net Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=comcast.net ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 877E23858CDB Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2001:558:fd02:2446::d ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1708975959; cv=none; b=iubou3KJUjiYKPNoGfFFFmXK1EzKKpdGY9WPepsZh8WgP+Dgz6bvrKA9MteVMa1rbJ8Jtbc2EtCGQBZQJgYAT1IvxEvSTCFHHemS98DRt4g7JefdRRrkAXmUULgPJ6JTtwnGhDIvVWydsMoZojtUvglgXIG88FtX0dJn/DJcYXU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1708975959; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tMQKU+zjJZ2gRRJF+y2gypC5x3LKyYrpNywsvxc4WJY=; h=DKIM-Signature:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date:Message-Id:To; b=VXqAy5N+iTZ1Fzms57Zh9Fo1iQ+W/oXUKX4CbJhGv+Mo8bHi59MwlH0lChWpaoQuTzlAbx5njRzlNaSgpSlI/zGulswfhdiGsq7JyXC5NXBihzt7Z7B/gP1xgxB7H43VEn7ZZfzE2jyMdN5+4GaSYX++qxlpF1GhcZK3OPBwPGc= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from resomta-h1p-028515.sys.comcast.net ([96.102.179.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 256/256 bits) (Client did not present a certificate) by resdmta-h1p-028597.sys.comcast.net with ESMTP id edDQrmaQInFwKegiJrrhDU; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 19:32:35 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=20190202a; t=1708975955; bh=iGjfYSEHu2NPg8hCQl6gKIvlsraC0JBjXuXe25GNdPc=; h=Received:Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date: Message-Id:To:Xfinity-Spam-Result; b=L4IdFUseY7F3znCezeNQcnGvlLwWE9H0MWntyTwT8KMDorl0qd+YrGo0YzMKARN8G f+AVUF00YdHUWXF9IO7AkVhqzDIAXwCsuP0p/PDr1Jogp/f56r6lExY88BVPkkK2l8 NhEqmokoJQMPzc3FxlNty9Wkwl9WefUICYzN6UvZyZAcl9yaFJGMExbEZc4qceTbZG 5Ai+HPeJKZYc9m0E3yAC7OEw3FrEzYr4iTNwHplRiN0xYKB1r72rJbRsgp/sOVzA3K 69SvyrsN+0KhJfG/UHuiiYsDVUNauOd0Ks7lf0UIDW1TsfCh70myHDXlFkBJGw0662 V4gBoQUsmi9RA== Received: from smtpclient.apple ([IPv6:2601:644:907e:710:e52c:2c2a:418d:3c9d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 256/256 bits) (Client did not present a certificate) by resomta-h1p-028515.sys.comcast.net with ESMTPSA id egiHr7bxCqLuxegiIrZjhI; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 19:32:35 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.4\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 RESEND] C, ObjC: Add -Wunterminated-string-initialization From: Mike Stump In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:32:33 -0800 Cc: Joseph Myers , GCC Patches Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20240206104529.8347-1-alx@kernel.org> <10AB5F4B-A27B-4798-9029-626A8B69DA6D@comcast.net> <60699168-584-3155-a463-4811af5d33fa@redhat.com> To: Alejandro Colomar X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.4) X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfOGUW/iLhNjcoQFZQPj+sIRxD04b0QR/q2pfaUKzB8BMMcZeheiFMLD8w9qQou57rSfnkwZEQrBYVUXxwXw1oJ+51nYMx/vmmZLIgg8viQu4unZzjkNv endGp+obFHHFzppHrDdoJXCFjDbLi5JUHE6EL+ccEDsFT6MTRg5NEZ7xFb/NpcBeczx9dcsUZzkV9ay52ubFFTUwucyFWkSGaOtG3/KP6VqnnCe5MORM2zP5 cJTVrH/ZwyLCcDSsELpkjgkwadBpY2A8wvDTyUHoBMdXP6vxz+RV2E4se1qTNP9ymzv47Mlaj6mqqFVBTY1GTQ== X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Feb 26, 2024, at 7:56 AM, Alejandro Colomar wrote: >=20 > I don't see an obvious order in that file. Where would you put the > option? The best place, would be to put it just after: -Warray-bounds -Warray-bounds=3Dn This is a functional style grouping that best mirrors the existing = ordering. A runner up would be next to the string options or near a = "terminating NUL", but after review, these don't seem more suitable. > Do you want me to sort(1) it first, and then insert the new > option in alphabetic order? No. Let others play at that.=