[Bug c/115496] RFE: new warning to detect suspicious multiline string literals

2024-06-14 Thread egallager at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115496 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/115496] RFE: new warning to detect suspicious multiline string literals

2024-06-14 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115496 --- Comment #6 from Andi Kleen --- Yes a # check would need to be target dependent.

[Bug c/115496] RFE: new warning to detect suspicious multiline string literals

2024-06-14 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115496 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||87403 Severity|normal

[Bug c/115496] RFE: new warning to detect suspicious multiline string literals

2024-06-14 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115496 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- # can also start a number in aarch64 and arm assembly and not a comment. So NO `#` is not universally starts a comment.

[Bug c/115496] RFE: new warning to detect suspicious multiline string literals

2024-06-14 Thread dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115496 --- Comment #4 from David Malcolm --- A possible input to the logic could be: be more paranoid about strings that will be used by inline asm. (In reply to Andi Kleen from comment #3) > When writing inline assembler an alternative to \n is to

[Bug c/115496] RFE: new warning to detect suspicious multiline string literals

2024-06-14 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115496 --- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen --- When writing inline assembler an alternative to \n is to use ; as separator e.g. asm("movl $1,%eax ; " "movl %eax,%ebx") there can be also comment mistake here like asm("movl $1,%eax # comment ;"