Hi Martin,

> On 4 Jan 2019, at 22:30, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> On Jan 4, 2019, at 2:03 PM, Martin Sebor <mse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> The improved handling of attribute positional arguments added
>> in r266195 introduced a regression on Darwin where attribute
>> format with the CFString archetype accepts CFString* parameter
>> types in positions where only char* would otherwise be allowed.
> 
> You didn't ask Ok?  I'll assume you want a review...  The darwin bits and the 
> testsuite bits look fine.

>> 
>> Index: gcc/doc/extend.texi
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc/doc/extend.texi      (revision 267580)
>> +++ gcc/doc/extend.texi      (working copy)
>> @@ -22368,10 +22368,12 @@ bit-fields.  See the Solaris man page for @code{cm
>>  @node Darwin Format Checks
>>  @subsection Darwin Format Checks
>>  
>> -Darwin targets support the @code{CFString} (or @code{__CFString__}) in the 
>> format
>> -attribute context.  Declarations made with such attribution are parsed for 
>> correct syntax
>> -and format argument types.  However, parsing of the format string itself is 
>> currently undefined
>> -and is not carried out by this version of the compiler.
>> +In addition to the full set of archetypes, Darwin targets also support
>> +the @code{CFString} (or @code{__CFString__}) archetype in the @code{format}
>> +attribute.  Declarations with this archetype are parsed for correct syntax
>> +and argument types.  However, parsing of the format string itself and
>> +validating arguments against it in calls to such functions is currently
>> +not performed.
>>  
>>  Additionally, @code{CFStringRefs} (defined by the @code{CoreFoundation} 
>> headers) may
>>  also be used as format arguments.  Note that the relevant headers are only 
>> likely to be
>> 

I find “archetype(s)” to be an usual (and possibly unfamiliar to many) word for 
this context.

how about:

s/archetype in/variant for the/ 

and then
 s/with this archetype/with this variant/

in the following sentence.

However, just 0.02GBP .. (fixing the fails is more important than bikeshedding 
the wording).

Iain

Reply via email to