On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 10:08:55AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> What solution would you like to see for these (pointer vs integer)
> mismatches?
For GCC 9, I'd probably like most adding the similar pointer vs. non-pointer
test to the return value like there is for the arguments, unless there is
On 3/14/19 2:43 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 12:50:28AM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
The C FE sadly passes through some really bad prototypes of builtin
functions as "harmless":
/* Accept "harmless" mismatches in function types such
as missing
On Wed, 13 Mar 2019, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The C FE sadly passes through some really bad prototypes of builtin
> functions as "harmless":
> /* Accept "harmless" mismatches in function types such
> as missing qualifiers or pointer vs same size integer
>
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 12:50:28AM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > The C FE sadly passes through some really bad prototypes of builtin
> > functions as "harmless":
> > /* Accept "harmless" mismatches in function types such
> > as missing qualifiers or pointer vs same size
On Wed, 13 Mar 2019, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The C FE sadly passes through some really bad prototypes of builtin
> functions as "harmless":
> /* Accept "harmless" mismatches in function types such
> as missing qualifiers or pointer vs same size integer
>
Hi!
The C FE sadly passes through some really bad prototypes of builtin
functions as "harmless":
/* Accept "harmless" mismatches in function types such
as missing qualifiers or pointer vs same size integer
mismatches. This is for the ffs and fprintf builtins.
