On Tue, 30 May 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Joseph,
>
> could you please review this patch and see whether it's Okay for commit
> now?
This version is OK.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
Joseph,
could you please review this patch and see whether it's Okay for commit
now?
thanks a lot for all your comments and suggestions for this patch.
Qing.
==
on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
another structure.
"The GCC exte
> On May 26, 2023, at 4:12 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Fri, 26 May 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>> Another question: is it better for me to rearrange the Patch 1/2 and Patch
>> 2/2 a little bit,
>> to put the FE , doc change and corresponding testing case together into one
On Fri, 26 May 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Another question: is it better for me to rearrange the Patch 1/2 and Patch
> 2/2 a little bit,
> to put the FE , doc change and corresponding testing case together into one
> patch, (you have approved the FE part of change in Patch 1/2).
Thank you for the suggestion.
> On May 26, 2023, at 1:59 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 May 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>>> On May 25, 2023, at 4:51 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>>
>>> The documentation in this case is OK, though claims about how a future
>>> version will b
On Thu, 25 May 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > On May 25, 2023, at 4:51 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> >
> > The documentation in this case is OK, though claims about how a future
> > version will behave have a poor track record (we tend to end up with such
> > claims persisting in the d
> On May 25, 2023, at 4:51 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> The documentation in this case is OK, though claims about how a future
> version will behave have a poor track record (we tend to end up with such
> claims persisting in the documentation even though the change in question
> didn't get
The documentation in this case is OK, though claims about how a future
version will behave have a poor track record (we tend to end up with such
claims persisting in the documentation even though the change in question
didn't get made and might sometimes no longer be considered desirable).
--
on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
another structure.
"The GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 "flexible array
member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursively)
to be a member of a structure.
There are two situations:
* A
on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
another structure.
"The GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 "flexible array
member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursively)
to be a member of a structure.
There are two situations:
* A
Hi, Joseph,
I modified the gcc/doc/extend.texi per your suggestion as following:
Let me know if you have further comment and suggestion on this patch.
I will send out the V8 of the patch after some testing.
Thanks.
Qing.
diff --git a/gcc/doc/exten
Joseph,
Thanks a lot for the review. And sorry for my late reply (just came back from a
short vacation).
> On May 19, 2023, at 5:12 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Fri, 19 May 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>> +GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 @dfn{flexible arr
On Fri, 19 May 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> +GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 @dfn{flexible array
"The GCC extension" or "A GCC extension".
> +@item
> +A structure containing a C99 flexible array member, or a union containing
> +such a structure, is the middle
on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
another structure.
"GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 "flexible array
member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursively)
to be a member of a structure.
There are two situations:
* A stru
Hi,
Is this patch ready for GCC14?
Thanks.
Qing
Begin forwarded message:
From: Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches
mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>>
Subject: Fwd: [V6][PATCH 2/2] Update documentation to clarify a GCC extension
Date: April 11, 2023 at 9:38:29 AM EDT
To: Joseph Myers mail
@gcc.gnu.org>>
Subject: Fwd: [V6][PATCH 2/2] Update documentation to clarify a GCC extension
Date: April 4, 2023 at 9:07:55 AM EDT
To: Joseph Myers mailto:jos...@codesourcery.com>>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek mailto:ja...@redhat.com>>, Richard Biener
mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com>>,
Ping….
Qing
Begin forwarded message:
From: Qing Zhao mailto:qing.z...@oracle.com>>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Update documentation to clarify a GCC extension
Date: March 28, 2023 at 11:49:44 AM EDT
To: ja...@redhat.com<mailto:ja...@redhat.com>,
jos...@codesourcery.com<mailto:jos...@c
on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
another structure. (PR77650)
"GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 "flexible array
member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursively)
to be a member of a structure.
There are two situations:
> On Mar 27, 2023, at 12:48 PM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Mar 27, 2023, at 12:31 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 04:22:25PM +, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
The latter IMHO. Having a warning with completely nonsensical name will
> On Mar 27, 2023, at 12:31 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 04:22:25PM +, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>> The latter IMHO. Having a warning with completely nonsensical name will
>>> just confuse users.
>>
>> Okay. -:)
>> How about "-Wstruct-with-fam-not-at-end”?
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 04:22:25PM +, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > The latter IMHO. Having a warning with completely nonsensical name will
> > just confuse users.
>
> Okay. -:)
> How about "-Wstruct-with-fam-not-at-end”? Or do you have any suggestion on
> the name?
Nobody will know
> On Mar 27, 2023, at 12:06 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 03:57:58PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
+Please use warning option @option{-Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end}
to
>>> This is certainly misnamed.
>>
>> The name “-Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end” was
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 03:57:58PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> >> +Please use warning option @option{-Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end}
> >> to
> > This is certainly misnamed.
>
> The name “-Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end” was just used the warning
> name from CLANG. -:)
>
> Shall we use
> On Mar 27, 2023, at 11:43 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 01:38:34PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 23, 2023, at 4:14 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>>
+Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end
+C
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 01:38:34PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 2023, at 4:14 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> >> +Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end
> >> +C C++ Var(warn_variable_sized_type_not_at_end) Warning
> >> +War
> On Mar 27, 2023, at 10:34 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2023-03-27 at 13:38 +, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 23, 2023, at 4:14 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>>
+Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end
>>
On Mon, 2023-03-27 at 13:38 +, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 2023, at 4:14 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> > > +Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end
> > > +C C++ Var(warn_variable_sized_type_not_at_end) Warnin
> On Mar 23, 2023, at 4:14 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>> +Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end
>> +C C++ Var(warn_variable_sized_type_not_at_end) Warning
>> +Warn about structures or unions with C99 flexible array members are not
>> +at
On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> +Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end
> +C C++ Var(warn_variable_sized_type_not_at_end) Warning
> +Warn about structures or unions with C99 flexible array members are not
> +at the end of a structure.
I think there's at least one word missing
Ping…
Please let me know if you have any further comments on the patch.
thanks.
Qing
Begin forwarded message:
From: Qing Zhao mailto:qing.z...@oracle.com>>
Subject: [V5][PATCH 2/2] Update documentation to clarify a GCC extension
Date: March 16, 2023 at 5:47:15 PM EDT
T
on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
another structure. (PR77650)
"GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 "flexible array
member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursively)
to be a member of a structure.
There are two situations:
Hi, Sandra,
Thanks a lot for your review and comment.
Yes, the issue you raised in below was a really tough one that I didn’t feel
very comfortable to handle it well…
This documentation change is mainly to fix: PR77650
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77650).
The real user case
On 2/24/23 11:35, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
gcc/c-family/ChangeLog:
* c.opt: New option -Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end.
gcc/c/ChangeLog:
* c-decl.cc (finish_struct): Issue warnings for new option.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* doc/extend.texi: Document GCC extension
> On Mar 12, 2023, at 7:14 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
>
> On 3/2/23 17:03, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> Ping.
>
> It looks to me like there is an associated code patch (for PR101832) that is
> still under technical discussion?
Yes, the 1st patch in this serie is the patch for PR10
On 3/2/23 17:03, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
Ping.
It looks to me like there is an associated code patch (for PR101832)
that is still under technical discussion? Or is this documentation
patch independent of that change?
-Sandra
Ping.
Qing
> On Feb 24, 2023, at 1:35 PM, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
> on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
> another structure.
>
> "GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 "flexible array
> member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursive
on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
another structure.
"GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 "flexible array
member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursively)
to be a member of a structure.
There are two situations:
* The st
> On Feb 23, 2023, at 7:56 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>> But the following:
>>
>> struct flex1 { int length1; char data1[]; };
>> struct flex2 { int length2; char data2[]; };
>> union union_flex { struct flex1 f1; struct flex2 f2; };
On Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> But the following:
>
> struct flex1 { int length1; char data1[]; };
> struct flex2 { int length2; char data2[]; };
> union union_flex { struct flex1 f1; struct flex2 f2; }; /* this is C
> standard. */
>
> struct out_flex { int n; union
> On Feb 23, 2023, at 5:04 PM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Feb 23, 2023, at 4:24 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>
>>> +@item
>>> +The structure with a C99 flexible array member is the field of
>>> +another union, for
> On Feb 23, 2023, at 4:24 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>> +@item
>> +The structure with a C99 flexible array member is the field of
>> +another union, for example:
>> +
>> +@smallexample
>> +struct flex1 @{ int length1; char data1[]; @}
On Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> +@item
> +The structure with a C99 flexible array member is the field of
> +another union, for example:
> +
> +@smallexample
> +struct flex1 @{ int length1; char data1[]; @}
> +struct flex2 @{ int length2; char data2[]; @}
> +
> +union out_
Ping * 2.
Hi, Joseph and Richard,
Could you please review this patch and let me know whether it’s ready for
committing into GCC13?
thanks.
Qing
Begin forwarded message:
From: Qing Zhao mailto:qing.z...@oracle.com>>
Subject: [v3][PATCH 2/2] Update documentation to clarify a GCC ext
Ping…
Qing
> On Feb 10, 2023, at 7:50 PM, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
> on structure with C99 flexible array member being nested in another structure.
>
> This is also fixed PR77650.
>
> " GCC extension accepts a structure containing a ISO C99 "flexible array
> member", or a union containing such a st
on structure with C99 flexible array member being nested in another structure.
This is also fixed PR77650.
" GCC extension accepts a structure containing a ISO C99 "flexible array
member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursively)
to be a member of a structure.
There are thr
45 matches
Mail list logo
