From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x636.google.com (mail-ej1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::636]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 686FC3857702 for ; Wed, 10 May 2023 12:30:23 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 686FC3857702 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-ej1-x636.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-9659443fb56so1109708466b.2 for ; Wed, 10 May 2023 05:30:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1683721822; x=1686313822; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=BbSx0VApbDkUkSRdsIiQBMkz3ta+YPlhajX09+bXqBk=; b=RzMa36j2mp+OuSzm1Bk7y74LPzSydqmQL+H+tC8iRdOPz6D5mUnlSUyVMKnEp0ZB1o rLCg4Mde+xoe9VvA4CfNcC2kgi00uvGpWNgw4AhGUAaBxkt4pCjIpwWnQDDL3G6aEAgO QSKJ/2iSd/z+SwzZWSfooxmtm0ZnZtg4iPrZfttaUr6DuGFsx1dMHuxpDFhf6XYjoEjQ buBAPccJ81TNev1Og8UJk6rixLWUN4UP4WLpiT/P4aMro9G2ZZ65ThG3tE9UbaGCleSt 1dSMIpN33HAodtC41gtqXdoqFi7PulUIroYg4sOcgQqA41VzwEzDXhCNklxMXbjF7HXp yn5A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683721822; x=1686313822; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=BbSx0VApbDkUkSRdsIiQBMkz3ta+YPlhajX09+bXqBk=; b=jnYzHLB9M5+KbwuW4LQPND1izPp8SBuFxIWDI4t+obzHB6Ju1zxxR0xpZfpl3gZjTn eKTXPkNDm5r3HCUQoU3WZLFipIF+jjTzkBk9b6mS2QGDzsFlT0dXdYXM/R5gJBSs4gkV rKuUoGNUsx9I4a9LKFcJKtPBr9qspMqsI9RZYbtXFhKQaCJAiLqWGDk/zzbAJoO4qQv6 Gaa9xFj+B1jTvyTN2CvnQ6eq3LgqWxzkptfcol/Q4u4LGXcs0mb7012GWi9AMaTwOOvZ 5j3Ow9E+f1YfrcOAAnxnfK/RGwD+APASTQNDoiTlDSMv1+NfxG4yQuMuMFn/d8GbXyVB vnMQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDw5BlzD6Ax5MDjvgL4UvYf5LEKZtFgF/gKKI81zrJFPz54EIoa6 f1HONRqy8/qVuSRiCrYDLLaXNfsIXwqgH2e1ceE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ7p02To6NMM8DLcte5cvdcZsd8JZ4btml31OlIATeqJDTT2OR9bPsiVhpJsCO++CZvdru+/Mk+MQLswgUeH5N0= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:fe01:b0:951:756d:653c with SMTP id wy1-20020a170906fe0100b00951756d653cmr14635169ejb.39.1683721822044; Wed, 10 May 2023 05:30:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <877cth66qb.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <20230509102201.6aa2a7d14fdb2f1e7abff449@killthe.net> <87r0rp5uf8.fsf@aarsen.me> <83ttwla1ep.fsf@gnu.org> <83lehx9vix.fsf@gnu.org> <83fs859unu.fsf@gnu.org> <864jolw8id.fsf@aarsen.me> <83cz38ap1a.fsf@gnu.org> <86o7mspn3a.fsf@aarsen.me> <83y1lw8kuq.fsf@gnu.org> <83pm788jc2.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83pm788jc2.fsf@gnu.org> From: Jonathan Wakely Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 13:30:10 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: arsen@aarsen.me, dje.gcc@gmail.com, jakub@redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,FREEMAIL_REPLY,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no 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 Wed, 10 May 2023 at 13:23, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > From: Jonathan Wakely > > Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 12:56:48 +0100 > > Cc: Arsen Arsenovi=C4=87 , dje.gcc@gmail.com, > > jakub@redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org > > > > On Wed, 10 May 2023 at 12:51, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Once again, it is not GCC's business to clean up the packages which > > > use GCC as the compiler. GCC is a tool, and should allow any > > > legitimate use of it that could be useful to someone. Warning about > > > dubious usage is perfectly fine, as it helps those who do that > > > unintentionally or due to ignorance. But completely failing an > > > operation that could have produce valid code is too radical. > > > > Again (are you even reading the replies?) > > Please assume that I read everything, subject to email delivery times. > There's no reason for you to assume anything but good faith from my > side. > > > GCC will not force anybody to change code, at most it this change > > would force them to consciously and intentionally say "I know this is > > not valid C code but I want to compile it anyway". By using a compiler > > option. This is not draconian, and you sound quite silly. > > If we are not forcing code change, why bother with making it an error > at all? The only reason for doing so that was provided was that this > _is_ a way of forcing people to change their programs. It stops people writing these errors in the first place. Not all code compiled with GCC is old, crufty K&R code that must be preserved for eternity. People are still using C to write new programs, and they are still making avoidable mistakes. The default for new code using new -std modes should be safer and less error prone.