From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from esa1.mentor.iphmx.com (esa1.mentor.iphmx.com [68.232.129.153]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 194803858D28 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 23:33:20 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 194803858D28 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codesourcery.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mentor.com X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,155,1665475200"; d="scan'208";a="89571555" Received: from orw-gwy-01-in.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.165]) by esa1.mentor.iphmx.com with ESMTP; 10 Nov 2022 15:33:19 -0800 IronPort-SDR: D0YWJ5bY2IakZ3e0LUJVtybhM070rQz40teQyjRAT8tOHLc4oi7UytX9lvUQ4SWVxvY81E8Y0h s9hN/YU+We4F3SDhhtCT8DAwFc9D/W8trpmfl0NTLkNoENJ5KUTsnnYp8ZifYK8oY7sPf46by5 UI79zpwwG3QRBgnZWJSUN6LXDvtNQ49wdHyEsp4J3zg969qdqjmrdSlUe5UBXwaEdso0PNjWFy 0o4CnAtWbICxLaZNYRsYyhYA9QXVb2l1KqfG93atTOgLukDXsQWd7vjBwYejneduoEPqvxXNlt jok= Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 23:33:14 +0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Florian Weimer CC: Marek Polacek , Subject: Re: -Wint-conversion, -Wincompatible-pointer-types, -Wpointer-sign: Are they hiding constraint C violations? In-Reply-To: <87h6z6sjqp.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <87mt8ysm3y.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <87h6z6sjqp.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Originating-IP: [137.202.0.90] X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-15.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.15) To svr-ies-mbx-10.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.10) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3110.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP 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 Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > I assumed that there was a rule similar to the the rule for #error for > any kind of diagnostic, which would mean that GCC errors are diagnostic > messages in the sense of the standard, but GCC warnings are not. The rule (for C) is that any diagnostic required by the standard should either be a warning or a pedwarn (where -pedantic-errors turns the latter but not the former into errors). There are a few cases where -pedantic enables warnings that aren't pedwarns because they aren't required by the standard; for example, -Wformat -pedantic warnings for use of printf format extensions. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com