Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> On 20/09/2007, Doug Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> We can't seem to decide whether ISO C++ really forbids comparisons
>> between pointers and integers or not. The first two are for == and !=,
>> the second two are for <, >, <=, >=. Why the inconsistency?
>>
>> typeck.c: error ("ISO C++ forbids comparison between pointer
>> and integer");
>> typeck.c: error ("ISO C++ forbids comparison between pointer
>> and integer");
>> typeck.c: pedwarn ("ISO C++ forbids comparison between
>> pointer and integer");
>> typeck.c: pedwarn ("ISO C++ forbids comparison between
>> pointer and integer");
These should all be pedwarns.
The basic principle is to use pedwarn for things that have well-defined
GNU semantics, but don't happen to be legal. That's especially true for
things that are valid in GNU C. Here, the well-defined GNU semantics
are that the integer is converted to the pointer type, as if by a cast.
A patch to convert to pedwarns is pre-approved, if accompanied by a
testcase.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
