inclyc added a comment. In D132266#3739513 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D132266#3739513>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> Thanks for working on this @nickdesaulniers! I think we actually want to go a > slightly different direction than this and disable the diagnostics entirely. > Basically, we should be make sure the format specifier diagnostics are > accounting for the clarifications in > https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2562.pdf. So the `h` and > `hh` modifiers would not even be pedantic warnings in this case. > > This should also have a release note associated with it and if you think > you've completed support for N2562, the clang/www/c_status.html page should > update the `Partial` markings. Sorry, I have some questions about this clarification agreement (currently working on N2562). The length modifier `hh` says in the standard that it should point to `signed char` or `unsigned char`, and if an `int` parameter is passed, why shouldn't we give such a warning? (even if it's pedantic somehow) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D132266/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D132266 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
