From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5957 invoked by alias); 4 May 2003 09:26:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 5925 invoked by uid 71); 4 May 2003 09:26:01 -0000 Date: Sun, 04 May 2003 09:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030504092601.5924.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Hallvard B Furuseth Subject: Re: preprocessor/10614: -Wtrigraphs does not catch // ??/ Reply-To: Hallvard B Furuseth X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00222.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR preprocessor/10614; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Hallvard B Furuseth To: neil@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: preprocessor/10614: -Wtrigraphs does not catch // ??/ Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 11:20:12 +0200 neil@gcc.gnu.org writes: > Not a bug. -Wcomment(s) does what you want. Sorry, no. What I want is for -Wtrigraphs to warn about code that will compile differently with and without trigraph support. However, - The warning from gcc -trigraphs -Wcomments gives no indication of this; it could come from a `//..\' line. - The warning is only given when -trigraphs or -std=c99 is given. So if I just compile with 'gcc -Wcomments', I'll get no clue that the program will silently compile differently on an ISO C compiler. -- Hallvard