Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
I went ahead and made some smaller changes, patch below.
Thanks.
I noticed you are using <q>...</q>, as in <q><code>e</code></q>,
which we usually don't. Why that?
My impression was that a one-letter <code> didn't stand out enough and
looked rather odd; if you think it improves consistency or readability,
feel free to change it.
* * *
I intent to commit the attached patch to document two new warning flags,
which were recently added. (Suggested in ISO/IEC Technical Report 24772
"Guidance for Avoiding Vulnerabilities through Language Selection and Use".)
Tobias
Index: changes.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.8/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.17
diff -u -r1.17 changes.html
--- changes.html 20 Aug 2012 12:23:39 -0000 1.17
+++ changes.html 21 Aug 2012 06:56:55 -0000
@@ -92,6 +92,21 @@
(re)allocation in hot loops. (For arrays, replacing <q><code>var=</code></q>
by <q><code>var(:)=</code></q> disables the automatic reallocation.)</li>
+ <li>The <a
+ href="http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Error-and-Warning-Options.html">
+ <code>-Wcompare-reals</code></a> flag has been added. When this flag is set,
+ warnings are issued when comparing <code>REAL</code> or
+ <code>COMPLEX</code> types for equality and inequality; consider replacing
+ <code>a == b</code> by <code>abs(a−b) < eps</code> with a suitable
+ <code>eps</code>. The -Wcompare-reals flag is enabled by
+ <code>-Wall</code>.</li>
+
+ <li>The <a
+ href="http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Error-and-Warning-Options.html">
+ <code>-Wtarget-lifetime</code></a> flag has been added (enabled with
+ <code>-Wall</code>), which warns if the pointer in a pointer assignment
+ might outlive its target.</li>
+
<li><p>Reading floating point numbers which use <q><code>q</code></q> for
the exponential (such as <code>4.0q0</code>) is now supported as vendor
extension for better compatibility with old data files. It is strongly