https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Luke Shumaker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lukeshu at lukeshu dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #30 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #29)
> As I said before, the issue is still how to define something general
> enough to be useful but that doesn't expose too much of the details of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #29 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
As I said before, the issue is still how to define something general
enough to be useful but that doesn't expose too much of the details of
GCC's internal data structures for format checki
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #28 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Jan Wielemaker from comment #27)
> It is really a pity this can't be resolved :( We have quite a few
> extensions in the SWI-Prolog source code, mostly for debug messages that
> deal with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Jan Wielemaker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j...@swi-prolog.org
--- Comment #27 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #26 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
It's hard to define something that is sufficiently general to be useful
but doesn't expose too much of the details of GCC's internal data
structures for describing standard formats. %b fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Grant Edwards changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||grant.b.edwards at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #24 from Tom Tromey ---
(In reply to David Crocker from comment #23)
> I need this feature too. Instead of waiting several more years for an
> all-singing all-dancing solution, PLEASE can we have a simple solution that
> allows me to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
David Crocker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcrocker at eschertech dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #22 from Cj Welborn ---
Thank you for the reply. It's probably out of my league, but I might take a
look when I get time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #21 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Cj Welborn from comment #20)
> Has anything changed since 2017 that would let me use
> register_printf_specifier and -Wformat warnings at the same time?
Not that I know of; people still can't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Cj Welborn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cjwelborn at live dot com
--- Comment #20 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #19 from Daniel Santos ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #18)
> The Linux kernel also has a bunch of printf format extensions that GCC
> doesn't know anything about:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/printk-formats.t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #18
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drazen.kacar at tereo dot hr
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #16 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #15)
> Although checking the commentary on newer mainline versions of the
> _bfd_default_error_handler function, it looks like it does some additional
> weird st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #14 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #13)
> I have been reconsidering the plugin approach given some new things
> I learned about the details of the firefox code (namely that it doesn't
> faithfully fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #13 from Tom Tromey ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #12)
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2015, tromey at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > E.g., firefox has a logging printf that accepts "%hs" to print char16_t*
> > strings. This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #12 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Thu, 29 Jan 2015, tromey at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> E.g., firefox has a logging printf that accepts "%hs" to print char16_t*
> strings. This extension means that printf checking can't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Tom Tromey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #10 from Philip Prindeville ---
On Aug 21, 2014, at 11:06 AM, joseph at codesourcery dot com
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
>
> --- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com dot com> ---
> On Thu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, philipp_s...@redfish-solutions.com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
>
> --- Comment #8 from Philip Prindeville
> ---
> (In reply to jos...@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #8 from Philip Prindeville ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #4)
> For the general issue, my inclination is that we should add plugin hooks
> into the format checking machinery that allow plugins to define format
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to bug 15338.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.santos at pobox dot com
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-02-17 18:24:25 UTC ---
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011, mark-gcc at glines dot org wrote:
> I'd like to request a finer grained means of control. A syntactical element
> (builtin/pragma/attribute/whate
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #3 from Mark Glines 2011-02-17
12:00:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think a patch that adds -Wno-format-unknown-specifier would be accepted if
> properly submitted:
Okay, I'll take a look at putting together a patch. Thanks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
--- Comment #2 from Mark Glines 2011-02-17
11:58:22 UTC ---
Created attachment 23380
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23380
47781.c
Here's a rather silly test case that demonstrates the problem with a simple
"bool" type.
$ gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47781
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
31 matches
Mail list logo
