https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67479
Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |diagnostic, easyhack
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2015-09-07
CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu.org
Version|unknown |6.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This should be easy to do and I think it would be accepted, you should really
give it a try:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GettingStarted#Basics:_Contributing_to_GCC_in_10_easy_steps
In fact, such an option would allow fixing bugs such as this one:
Index: c-format.c
===================================================================
--- c-format.c (revision 227095)
+++ c-format.c (working copy)
@@ -1244,11 +1244,12 @@
return 0;
}
*format = fcp + 1;
- if (pedantic && !dollar_format_warned)
+ if (warn_format_pedantic && !dollar_format_warned)
{
- warning (OPT_Wformat_, "%s does not support %%n$ operand number
formats",
- C_STD_NAME (STD_EXT));
- dollar_format_warned = 1;
+ dollar_format_warned =
+ pedwarn (input_location, OPT_Wformat_pedantic,
+ "%s does not support %%n$ operand number formats",
+ C_STD_NAME (STD_EXT));
}
if (overflow_flag || argnum == 0
|| (dollar_first_arg_num && argnum > dollar_arguments_count))
Since 'pedantic' should only be used in the cases described in the guidelines
(https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/DiagnosticsGuidelines) and "if(pedantic) warning()"
is not one of them. (This means that every use of pedantic in c-format.c is
currently a minor bug).
Fixing this will also contribute towards fixing PR53075.
