This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: warning: trigraph ... ignored
Zack Weinberg writes:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 12:46:00AM +0100, Nix wrote:
> > Thorsten Kranzkowski <th@Marvin.DL8BCU.ampr.org> writes:
> > > I don't exactly know what trigraphs are, I assume some weird replacement
> > > expression for unusual characters. But I don't think gcc should warn about
> > > them in _comments_ !
> >
> [snip excellent explanation]
Why, thank you :) I was just trying to take some load off you (who
normally explains these things); after all, you have the new
preprocessor to write, you don't have time to explain the infelicities
of the old one to all and sundry :)
> All that you say is true - but I want to add that there is no good
> reason for us to warn about trigraphs inside comments that don't
> affect where it starts or ends. E.g. if you write
I *thought* that was odd, but I thought there might be a political
reason. i.e. `trigraphs suck so we should deprecate them and warn about
them at every opportunity'. (The entirely correct comment in the gcc
manual under -trigraphs also tends to support this view.)
Of course, inside a comment trigraphs're *likely* to be harmless, but
??/ in particular might have unexpected effects. However, the case in
which it does is so rare and contrived that we can probably ignore it.
> /* asm-???/delay.h */
>
> the program has the same meaning whether or not the trigraph is
> converted. We still warn about that because the part of cpp that does
> trigraph conversion doesn't know anything about comments.
Ahh. I see.
--
> ... knowing the alignment of Orcs in AD&D.
Doubleword.
--- David Jacoby and Greg Andrews in the Monastery