On Jun 05 2020, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wnonnull5.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
> +/* PR c++/86568 - -Wnonnull warnings should highlight the relevant argument
> + not the closing parenthesis.
> + { dg-do compile }
> + { dg-options "-O2 -Wall" } */
> +
> +#define NONNULL __attribute__ ((nonnull))
> +
> +#if __cplusplus < 201103L
> +# define nullptr __null
> +#endif
> +
> +struct S
> +{
> + void
> + f0 (const void*) const; // { dg-message "in a call to non-static
> member function 'void S::f0\\(const void\\*\\) const'" }
> +
> + void
> + f1 (const void*) const; // { dg-message "in a call to non-static
> member function 'void S::f1\\(const void\\*\\) const'" }
> +
> + void
> + f2 (const void*) const; // { dg-message "in a call to non-static
> member function 'void S::f2\\(const void\\*\\) const'" }
> +
> + NONNULL void
> + f3 (const void*, const void*); // { dg-message "in a call to function
> 'void S::f3\\(const void\\*, const void\\*\\)' declared 'nonnull'" }
> +
> + NONNULL void
> + f4 (const void*, const void*); // { dg-message "in a call to function
> 'void S::f4\\(const void\\*, const void\\*\\)' declared 'nonnull'" }
> +
> + NONNULL void
> + f5 (const void*, const void*); // { dg-message "in a call to function
> 'void S::f5\\\(const void\\*, const void\\*\\)' declared 'nonnull'" }
> +
> + NONNULL void
> + f6 (const void*, const void*); // { dg-message "in a call to function
> 'void S::f6\\\(const void\\*, const void\\*\\)' declared 'nonnull'" }
> +};
> +
> +void warn_nullptr_this ()
> +{
> + ((S*)nullptr)->f0 (""); // { dg-warning "3:'this' pointer null"
> "pr86568" { xfail *-*-* } }
> + // { dg-warning "this' pointer null"
> "pr86568" { target *-*-* } .-1 }
Please give these tests unique names.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, [email protected]
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."
