------- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-06-05 17:36 ------- Subject: Re: [4.5/4.6 Regression] gcc 4.5.0 requires c9x compiler to build
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, manu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > Do you mean we should not use VA_ARGS in GCC? Then, what? static inline? Is > this warned by -pedantic? Shouldn't it? Variadic macros are not standard C90 or C++98 and should only be used *conditionally* if the compiler being used to build GCC supports them. Otherwise you need to define a function - which in practice won't be inline (inline variadic functions, passing on their variable arguments to another variadic function, require GNU extensions that are much more recent than variadic macros). I think #if GCC_VERSION >= 3000 || __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L is a suitable condition for support of variadic macros. Because these macros may be used *conditionally*, GCC is built with -Wno-variadic-macros. For the cases that are inserting UNKNOWN_LOCATION, I'd suggest just changing all the call sites of the macro to pass UNKNOWN_LOCATION explicitly, and removing the macro. That should deal with build_call_expr and with build_call_nofold in builtins.c. For the cases in sel-sched-dump.h I'd suggest just using normal variadic functions that use interfaces such as vfprintf and vasprintf, and not macros at all. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44426
