[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #21 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-29 08:03:07 UTC --- Hi Paolo (cc. Jason), for options that enable other options only in specific languages, it would be good to use the new LangEnabledBy in the .opt files. (For example, this will make -Wno-missing-braces -Wall work as expected).
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 --- Comment #22 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-05-29 09:05:51 UTC --- Oops, sorry, I think at some point I wondered if something was in order but then forgot. If you can tell me the right syntax, I can add it, must be quite simple, right?
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 --- Comment #23 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-29 09:22:05 UTC --- It is explained here http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Option-properties.html#Option-properties A patch like the following should work (plus removing the special handling in c-opts.c) Index: c.opt === --- c.opt(revision 187628) +++ c.opt(working copy) @@ -463,7 +463,7 @@ Warn about suspicious declarations of \main\ Wmissing-braces -C ObjC C++ ObjC++ Var(warn_missing_braces) Warning +C ObjC C++ ObjC++ Var(warn_missing_braces) Warning LangEnabledBy(C ObjC, Wall) Warn about possibly missing braces around initializers There is also EnabledBy, which is unconditional. The plan is to convert sub-options to use this infrastructure. There is also some functionality missing: * An option enabled only if two options are combined. (-Wextra -Wunused enable -Wunused-parameter). * An option enabled by some arbitrary condition. And some options are problematic because they currently have bugs: warn_format is 0 by default but the value of -Wformat in the gcc_opts structure is -1, thus calling warning(OPT_Wformat) without checking warn_format means enabled by default. Some tests expect such diagnostics to be enabled by default. :-(
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 --- Comment #24 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-05-29 09:41:01 UTC --- Thanks. I'm going to test the patchlet momentarily, I think it qualifies as obvious.
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 --- Comment #19 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-28 17:42:34 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Mon May 28 17:42:29 2012 New Revision: 187937 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=187937 Log: /c-family 2012-05-28 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com PR c++/25137 * c-opts.c (c_common_handle_option): For C++ -Wall doesn't enable -Wmissing_braces. 2012-05-28 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com PR c++/25137 * doc/invoke.texi: Document -Wmissing-braces not enabled by -Wall for C++. /testsuite 2012-05-28 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com PR c++/25137 * g++.dg/warn/Wbraces3.C: New. * g++.dg/warn/Wbraces4.C: Likewise. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wbraces3.C trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wbraces4.C Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/c-family/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/c-family/c-opts.c trunk/gcc/doc/invoke.texi trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #19 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-28 17:42:34 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Mon May 28 17:42:29 2012 New Revision: 187937 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=187937 Log: /c-family 2012-05-28 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com PR c++/25137 * c-opts.c (c_common_handle_option): For C++ -Wall doesn't enable -Wmissing_braces. 2012-05-28 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com PR c++/25137 * doc/invoke.texi: Document -Wmissing-braces not enabled by -Wall for C++. /testsuite 2012-05-28 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com PR c++/25137 * g++.dg/warn/Wbraces3.C: New. * g++.dg/warn/Wbraces4.C: Likewise. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wbraces3.C trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wbraces4.C Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/c-family/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/c-family/c-opts.c trunk/gcc/doc/invoke.texi trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog --- Comment #20 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-05-28 17:44:52 UTC --- Done.
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #20 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-05-28 17:44:52 UTC --- Done.
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #17 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-26 21:21:51 UTC --- Hmm. I see the argument, but it seems to me that the purpose of -Wmissing-braces is precisely to warn about this sort of thing. Perhaps it just shouldn't be part of -Wall in C++ mode, particularly in C++11 since initializer lists are a lot more flexible now.
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |paolo.carlini at oracle dot |gnu.org |com Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0 --- Comment #18 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-05-26 21:46:03 UTC --- Let's take it out of C++ then.
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dodji at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #16 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-08-30 09:41:23 UTC --- Maybe Dodji is interested in working on this?!? Can be quite annoying with tr1::array and std::array in C++11, of course.
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
baffo32 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||baffo32 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #15 from baffo32 at gmail dot com 2011-08-27 08:53:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
GCC allows it too, otherwise it would be an error not a warning.
I believe GCC fails for multi-dimensional arrays?
arrayarrayint,2,2 a{ {1,2},{3,4} }; // won't compile without another pair
of {}
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
Matti Rintala bitti at iki dot fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bitti at iki dot fi
--- Comment #12 from Matti Rintala bitti at iki dot fi 2010-12-17 11:21:06
UTC ---
Has there been any progress with this bug/problem? The latest C++0x draft still
explicitly allows array aT, N = { initializer-list }; (23.3.1/2), but at
least gcc 4.5.1 still gives a warning with -Wall enabled.
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW AssignedTo|paolo.carlini at oracle dot |unassigned at gcc dot |com |gnu.org
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-17 11:33:48 UTC --- GCC allows it too, otherwise it would be an error not a warning. But no, there hasn't been any progress I know of, the warning is still given for std::array in C++0x mode as well as tr1::array
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137 --- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2010-12-17 12:22:50 UTC --- I'm sorry I don't mean to wrk on this over the next weeks, maybe sombody will ne interested in picking my patch in this thread and completing it (both for C and C++): http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-11/msg00430.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-11/msg00468.html
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #11 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-21 16:50 --- Looking into it: I mean to investigate whether a relaxed warning per Comment #9 is implementable in a decently clean way. -- pcarlini at suse dot de changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pcarlini at suse dot de |dot org | Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-09-21 16:50:22 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 05:44 --- *** Bug 27015 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lidaobing at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #9 from gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org 2005-12-06 13:07 ---
I've often found this warning to be a nuisance, because it's correct and
well-defined to omit some braces from the initializer.
There are many cases where the warning is useful, e.g. with aggregates that
have several members (which may be aggregates themselves), but when the type
contains a single member (possibly of array type) then the extra braces are
often just clutter.
Pff the top of my head, I would like a way to disable the warning iff the
aggregate has a single member and iff the initializer contains exactly the
right number of elements to initialize that single member. e.g.
struct S { int s[3]; };
S s1 = { 1, 1, 1 }; // OK - missing braces but correct number
S s2 = { 1, 1 }; // WARN - no initializer for s2.s[2]
S s3 = { { 1, 1 } }; // OK - braces correct but missing init
I don't think this would be useful only for tr1::array, but for lots of similar
code. Obvious and closely-related examples are the block and carray templates
in Austern and Josuttis's books.
--
gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 05:04 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
The following code:
struct S
{ int x[3]; };
void f()
{ S s = {1,2,3};}
With -Wmissing-braces (which is implied by -Wall, among others) gives:
warning: missing braces around initializer for 'int [3]'
In the specific case where a struct contains only a single array, adding the
extra braces doesn't really seem that useful.
The reason it would be nice to fix this that in the definition of tr1::array
in
the TR1 specification (page 88, 6.2.2) says
After more thoughts on this issue, it appears to me that it is asking for
a special casing justforo tr1::array to work. I don't know whether
that is a workable approach. I would reommend -Wno-missing-braces in this
specific case. Thoughts?
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-28 14:52 --- I don't see why the warning is not useful at all, in fact I rather have the C++ standard fix their wording of TR1's array. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #2 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2005-11-28 15:17 ---
Thats an option too, but I thought I'd see about gcc's opinion first, as I
expected a much faster reply than I would get from the C++ steering committee
:)
I find the warning helpful for constructs like:
struct S { int x[3]; int y[3]; }, or struct T {int x; S s;}; and such things, I
felt it was less useful for a single array inside a struct.
I'm guessing one of the major reasons that it would be nice to keep the style:
arrayint,3 s = {1,2,3};
is to make it look as possible like:
int s[3] = {1,2,3};
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #3 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-11-28 16:15 --- Subject: Re: Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | I don't see why the warning is not useful at all, in fact I rather | have the C++ standard fix their wording of TR1's array. it is not the C++ standard; but definitely a bug in the specification. he problem shoul dbe reported there. -- Gaby -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #4 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-11-28 16:18
---
Subject: Re: New: Warning missing braces around initializer causing
problems with tr1::array
chris at bubblescope dot net [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| The following code:
|
| struct S
| { int x[3]; };
|
| void f()
| { S s = {1,2,3};}
|
| With -Wmissing-braces (which is implied by -Wall, among others) gives:
|
| warning: missing braces around initializer for 'int [3]'
|
| In the specific case where a struct contains only a single array, adding the
| extra braces doesn't really seem that useful.
|
| The reason it would be nice to fix this that in the definition of tr1::array
in
| the TR1 specification (page 88, 6.2.2) says
|
| 2.An array is an aggregate ([dcl.init.aggr]) that can be initialized with the
| syntax
| array a = { initializer-list };
I believe there is a slight confusion between a C-array and a TR1
class-type called array. You have found a bug in the TR1; would you
mind making a report?
-- Gaby
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #5 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2005-11-28 16:28 ---
I'll make a report. Don't worry, I'm clear on the difference between tr1::array
and a C array, I just wanted to check that we agree this should produce a
warning (in which case I will go through the tr1::array testcases, and add the
extra pair of {})
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #6 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2005-11-28 16:33 ---
Actually, is a report really approriate? Writing arrayint,3 = {1,2,3} is
perfectly valid C++, just warned about with -Wmissing-braces
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
[Bug c++/25137] Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with tr1::array
--- Comment #7 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-11-28 18:46
---
Subject: Re: Warning missing braces around initializer causing problems with
tr1::array
chris at bubblescope dot net [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Actually, is a report really approriate? Writing arrayint,3 = {1,2,3} is
| perfectly valid C++, just warned about with -Wmissing-braces
You're absolutely right! I forgot 8.5.1/11!
Can't we have simple, general rules, without list of special cases? :-(
-- Gaby
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
