[PING][PATCH v3] Add new warning Wmissing-designated-initializers [PR39589]

2025-02-05 Thread Peter Frost
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-January/672568.html

[PATCH v3] Add new warning Wmissing-designated-initializers [PR39589]

2025-01-03 Thread Peter Frost
v3 Patch: * adds documentation * fixes formatting * minor code cleanup Currently the behaviour of Wmissing-field-initializers is inconsistent between C and C++. The C warning assumes that missing designated initializers are deliberate, and does not warn. The C++ warning doe

[PING #3][PATCH v2] Add new warning Wmissing-designated-initializers [PR39589]

2024-11-14 Thread Peter Frost
Hi all, Pinginghttps://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/662590.html for a review if anyone has a moment. Many thanks, Peter

Re: [PATCH v2] Add new warning Wmissing-designated-initializers [PR39589]

2024-10-06 Thread Peter Frost
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/662590.html

[PATCH v2] Add new warning Wmissing-designated-initializers [PR39589]

2024-09-07 Thread Peter Frost
v2 Patch: * adds proper changelog text * fixes typo in c.opt Currently the behaviour of Wmissing-field-initializers is inconsistent between C and C++. The C warning assumes that missing designated initializers are deliberate, and does not warn. The C++ warning does warn for missin

Re: [PATCH] Add new warning Wmissing-designated-initializers [PR39589]

2024-09-07 Thread Peter Frost
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/661510.html

[PATCH] Add new warning Wmissing-designated-initializers [PR39589]

2024-08-26 Thread Peter Frost
Currently the behaviour of Wmissing-field-initializers is inconsistent between C and C++. The C warning assumes that missing designated initializers are deliberate, and does not warn. The C++ warning does warn for missing designated initializers. This patch changes the behaviour of Wmissing-field