https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Octal literals are very useful for expressing unix/posix file modes like 0777
or even 0666. So having the warning part of eith -Wall or -Wextra does not
make sense.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
I would suggest that you implement this as a plugin. Plugins are particularly
useful for enforcing this type of coding standards. If you make a generally
useful plugin like one enforcing MISRA standards,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
--- Comment #5 from David Brown ---
I agree that warnings to match something like the MISRA coding standards would
be best done as a plugin.
But I believe that in this case, warning on octal literals would be quite a
small addition to the main gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Octal literals are also used in macro definitions from system headers, so
care would be needed that a warning doesn't apply to those.
Such a warning should of course not apply to 0 (and mayb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
Frank Heckenbach changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||f.heckenb...@fh-soft.de
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #8)
> *** Bug 70952 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
While this was a mistake, it still might be worth grouping the flag proposed in
that bug, -Woctal-e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60523
--- Comment #10 from David Brown ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #9)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #8)
> > *** Bug 70952 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>
> While this was a mistake, it still might be wort
10 matches
Mail list logo
