[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d9922e4bb5d8014ff3e4057442bbd6d2ed58cc36 commit r13-6607-gd9922e4bb5d8014ff3e4057442bbd6d2ed58cc36 Author: Jeff Law Date: Sat Mar 11 09:34:19 2023 -0700 Fwd: [PATCHJ]: Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify online manual infelicities gcc/ PR web/88860 * doc/extend.texi: Clarify Attribute Syntax a bit.
[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860 --- Comment #9 from Jonny Grant --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8) > Has it been reviewed and approved? I can't do that for patches outside the > libstdc++-v3 dir. I've not yet received a reply to it on gcc-patches list. https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-December/609132.html
[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- Has it been reviewed and approved? I can't do that for patches outside the libstdc++-v3 dir.
[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860 --- Comment #7 from Jonny Grant --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6) > (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #5) > > Re the patches, I recall I did email them, but pasted here too as another > > developer was doing that. I'll have a good read of that contribution guide. > > If you've emailed them to the list then it's better to link to the mails in > the list archive, not duplicate them here. > > > What did you think of the "infelicities" patch? > > It loses a little of the nuance, i.e. that the limitations are unfortunate. > But I think it's an improvement. Ok thank you. May I ask if you could commit the patch please?
[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #5) > Re the patches, I recall I did email them, but pasted here too as another > developer was doing that. I'll have a good read of that contribution guide. If you've emailed them to the list then it's better to link to the mails in the list archive, not duplicate them here. > What did you think of the "infelicities" patch? It loses a little of the nuance, i.e. that the limitations are unfortunate. But I think it's an improvement.
[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860
--- Comment #5 from Jonny Grant ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #1)
> > --- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
> > +++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
> > @@ -9353,6 +9353,13 @@ __attribute__((noreturn)) void d0 (void),
> > the @code{noreturn} attribute applies to all the functions
> > declared; the @code{format} attribute only applies to @code{d1}.
> >
> > +@noindent
> > +The following __attribute__ causes gcc to check run printf argument checks
>
> "check run printf argument checks"
>
>
> > on argument '3' which is 'const char * string format' (when visible at
> > compile time), against argument '4' the '...' variadic ellipsis. In the
> > example below, arguments '1' and '2' are not checked.
> > +
> > +@smallexample
> > +void string_format(const char * prefix, size_t line, const char * const
> > format, ...) __attribute__ ((format (printf,3,4)));
> > +@end smallexample
>
>
> This argument seems to be documenting the effects of the printf attribute,
> not attribute syntax. Why would it belong on this page?
You're right, I found this page with an example that is fine
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-12.2.0/gcc/Common-Function-Attributes.html#Common-Function-Attributes
Re the patches, I recall I did email them, but pasted here too as another
developer was doing that. I'll have a good read of that contribution guide.
What did you think of the "infelicities" patch?
Thanks
[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #1)
> --- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
> +++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
> @@ -9353,6 +9353,13 @@ __attribute__((noreturn)) void d0 (void),
> the @code{noreturn} attribute applies to all the functions
> declared; the @code{format} attribute only applies to @code{d1}.
>
> +@noindent
> +The following __attribute__ causes gcc to check run printf argument checks
"check run printf argument checks"
> on argument '3' which is 'const char * string format' (when visible at
> compile time), against argument '4' the '...' variadic ellipsis. In the
> example below, arguments '1' and '2' are not checked.
> +
> +@smallexample
> +void string_format(const char * prefix, size_t line, const char * const
> format, ...) __attribute__ ((format (printf,3,4)));
> +@end smallexample
This argument seems to be documenting the effects of the printf attribute, not
attribute syntax. Why would it belong on this page?
[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Please send patches to the mailing list instead of attaching them here where they will not get reviewed. https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#patches
[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860
--- Comment #2 from Jonny Grant ---
2022-12-26 Jonathan Grant
* gcc/doc/extend.texi: Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify online manual
infelicities
>From 8b142ad8973dc67289e197e30966490a944e4819 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jonathan Grant
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2022 20:58:29 +
Subject: [PATCH] Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify gcc online manual infelicities
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Grant
---
gcc/doc/extend.texi | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index adba057c190..88fc625050b 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -9190,7 +9190,7 @@ have to optimize it to just @code{return 42 + 42;}.
This section describes the syntax with which @code{__attribute__} may be
used, and the constructs to which attribute specifiers bind, for the C
language. Some details may vary for C++ and Objective-C@. Because of
-infelicities in the grammar for attributes, some forms described here
+limitations in the grammar for attributes, some forms described here
may not be successfully parsed in all cases.
There are some problems with the semantics of attributes in C++. For
--
2.37.2
[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860
--- Comment #1 from Jonny Grant ---
2022-12-26 Jonathan Grant
* gcc/doc/extend.texi: Bugzilla 88860 - Add attribute format printf
example
>From 1668dc58206428ee92ff142bafb5f545dba029ae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jonathan Grant
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2022 21:02:35 +
Subject: [PATCH] Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify gcc online manual attribute format
printf example
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Grant
---
gcc/doc/extend.texi | 7 +++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index 88fc625050b..9b200c6f3a0 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -9353,6 +9353,13 @@ __attribute__((noreturn)) void d0 (void),
the @code{noreturn} attribute applies to all the functions
declared; the @code{format} attribute only applies to @code{d1}.
+@noindent
+The following __attribute__ causes gcc to check run printf argument checks on
argument '3' which is 'const char * string format' (when visible at compile
time), against argument '4' the '...' variadic ellipsis. In the example below,
arguments '1' and '2' are not checked.
+
+@smallexample
+void string_format(const char * prefix, size_t line, const char * const
format, ...) __attribute__ ((format (printf,3,4)));
+@end smallexample
+
An attribute specifier list may appear immediately before the comma,
@code{=} or semicolon terminating the declaration of an identifier other
than a function definition. Such attribute specifiers apply
--
2.37.2
