On 2019-06-22 20:34:35 +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> > > I don't object, but have a request: can you explore if changing
> > > the type of the respective variable, instead of adding casts, is
> > > equivalent? Especially the changes in parse_
Hi,
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I don't object, but have a request: can you explore if changing the type of
the respective variable, instead of adding casts, is equivalent? Especially
the changes in parse_escape_string look as if that's possible.
(I consider such type change on
On 2019-06-22 01:07:17 +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2019, Pascal Cuoq wrote:
> > If no-one objects, I will push in a few days the following patch,
>
> I don't object, but have a request: can you explore if changing the type of
> the respective variable, instead of adding casts, is e
Hi,
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019, Pascal Cuoq wrote:
If no-one objects, I will push in a few days the following patch,
I don't object, but have a request: can you explore if changing the type
of the respective variable, instead of adding casts, is equivalent?
Especially the changes in parse_escape_s
Friends -
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 07:15:11PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2019-06-21 18:25:29 +0200, Ivo van Poorten wrote:
> > clang/llvm. gcc is on its way out IMHO. Apple uses clang [...]
Troll alert. :-)
> Every compiler has its own benefits. That's why tcc still exists
> in particula
On 2019-06-21 18:25:29 +0200, Ivo van Poorten wrote:
> clang/llvm. gcc is on its way out IMHO. Apple uses clang extensively
> for both macOS and iOS. It's the default compiler. And the Android
> Linux kernel already builds with clang and soon vanilla will, too.
> There are distro's almost fully bu
On 2019-06-21 15:33:24 +0200, Christian Jullien wrote:
> If I read you correctly, you want to protest if type does not
> strictly match format directive.
>
> This is something even gcc does NOT ensure by default:
[...]
This is undefined behavior, and the compiler is not required
to complain. This
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 17:24:16 +0200 "Christian Jullien"
wrote:
> IMHO gcc compatibility (or VC++ on Windows) should be a goal for tcc.
> We are many to use tcc for its fast development cycle but gcc/vc
> remains the only choice for release.
clang/llvm. gcc is on its way out IMHO. Apple uses clang
st development cycle but gcc/vc remains the only
> choice for release.
>
>
> From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:tinycc-devel-bounces+eligis=orange...@nongnu.org]
> On Behalf Of ian
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 16:54
> To: Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] matc
ourse.
Christian
From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:tinycc-devel-bounces+eligis=orange...@nongnu.org]
On Behalf Of Pascal Cuoq
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 17:09
To: i...@sibian.fr; tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] match formats and arguments exactly
On 21 Jun 2019, at 16:54, ian
orange...@nongnu.org]
On Behalf Of ian
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 16:54
To: Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] match formats and arguments exactly
Hi Pascal,
I *know* that (including the no-way part).
And I *know* too that this misuse is sometimes what's expected by
developers.
On 21 Jun 2019, at 16:54, ian
mailto:sibian0...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Anyway, I don't think it's desirable that kinds of pointers are checked.
Should I emphasize that I am not offering to implement a warning in TCC? If you
think that GCC should not emit the warning shown by Christian, you can eit
Hi Pascal,
I *know* that (including the no-way part).
And I *know* too that this misuse is sometimes what's expected by
developers...
Anyway, I don't think it's desirable that kinds of pointers are checked.
Still my humble opinion.
-- ian (i...@sibian.fr)
-- développeur compulsif
Le 21/06/2019 à
On 21 Jun 2019, at 16:10, ian
mailto:sibian0...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hello,IMHO, considering that flexibility is what I love in C programming, and
that this checking should be printf job (in that case),
Unfortunately, this is not how printf, or other variadic functions, work. The
way they work
On 21 Jun 2019, at 15:33, Christian Jullien
mailto:eli...@orange.fr>> wrote:
If I read you correctly, you want to protest if type does not strictly match
format directive.
I'm not protesting, I'm just offering a patch (in a series of patches) that
makes the TCC source code free of easily avoi
~^
>
> %p
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Pascal Cuoq [mailto:c...@trust-in-soft.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 15:17
> To: jull...@eligis.com; tinycc-
ay, June 21, 2019 15:17
To: jull...@eligis.com; tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] match formats and arguments exactly
> On 21 Jun 2019, at 14:56, Christian Jullien wrote:
>
> This is a valuable check but IMHO, it should be controlled by -Wformat (as
> GNU gcc
> On 21 Jun 2019, at 14:56, Christian Jullien wrote:
>
> This is a valuable check but IMHO, it should be controlled by -Wformat (as
> GNU gcc) and set of false by default.
> Otherwise, I suspect tcc users will have a lot a new warnings.
I'm not implementing a new warning in TCC. I am only ensur
devel [mailto:tinycc-devel-bounces+eligis=orange...@nongnu.org]
On Behalf Of Pascal Cuoq
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 12:00
To: tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: [Tinycc-devel] match formats and arguments exactly
Hello,
If no-one objects, I will push in a few days the following patch, which
ensures that the
Hello,
If no-one objects, I will push in a few days the following patch, which ensures
that the types of arguments to printing functions correspond exactly to their
formatters (%x expects an unsigned int, %s expects a pointer to character type,
etc.).
Pascal
formatting.patch
Description: for
20 matches
Mail list logo