public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Christian Ehrhardt" <ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, Subject: Re: preprocessor/7263: __extension__ keyword doesn't suppress warning on LL or ULL constants Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 02:46:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20021210104602.6207.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) The following reply was made to PR preprocessor/7263; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Christian Ehrhardt" <ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de> To: Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk> Cc: andrew@andypo.net, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: preprocessor/7263: __extension__ keyword doesn't suppress warning on LL or ULL constants Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:36:37 +0100 On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 12:22:56AM +0000, Neil Booth wrote: > ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de wrote:- > > > I can confirm this on recent 3.3. The warning is from the preprocessor > > where we don't know about __extension__. Maybe the fix is to just > > document this. Anyway: Category changed to preprocessor and priority > > raised to medium because this is technically a regression. > > I think we just document __extension__ as only applying to non-CPP issues; > we can't reasonably expect CPP to interact with a parser in all situations > and under all future code changes. I imagine we could enhance existing > code so that we don't have this problem in cases where it is the C front > end requesting the number interpretation, since it could easily pass a > "don't warn about foo" flag to cpplib. However expecting cpplib to get > it right for #if is not reasonable, seeing as #if can occur between any > two tokens. The real problem seems to be that cpplib has its own copy of warning options in pfile->cpp_opts. The C parser disables the global pedantic flag while __extension__ is in effect. However, this change is not propagated into cpp_opts. If this was done we could just add the pedantic check in cppexp.c. However, neither do I see a clean way to propagate the global pedantic flag into cpp_opts nor to check the global flag from cpplib. regards Christian -- THAT'S ALL FOLKS!
next reply other threads:[~2002-12-10 10:46 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2002-12-10 2:46 Christian Ehrhardt [this message] -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2002-12-11 13:16 neil 2002-12-09 16:26 Neil Booth 2002-12-09 15:26 Joseph S. Myers 2002-12-09 15:10 ehrhardt
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=20021210104602.6207.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de \ --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=nobody@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: linkBe 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).