On Tue, 6 May 2014, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 11:37:58PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > As a matter of QoI we should also diagnose use of _Atomic in the return > > type or argument types of main (something I deferred doing in the initial > > _Atomic support). > > Ok, I opened PR61077 and I'm taking it. But I wonder if I should > diagnose if the second parameter is e.g.: > _Atomic char **argv; > char *_Atomic *argv;
Yes, those should be diagnosed (remember that _Atomic char is allowed to be bigger than char, so those certainly aren't reasonable types for arguments to main). -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
