This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Adoption of C subset standards

On 9 January 2017 at 14:22, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 9 January 2017 at 14:15, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>> On 01/09/2017 08:58 AM, David Brown wrote:
>>> I don't know about CERT-C, but one of the challenges of implementing
>>> MISRA coding standards checking in gcc is that the MISRA documents are
>>> not free.  They are cheap (about $10, I think), but since they are not
>>> free there are likely to be copyright complications.  I think it would
>>> be difficult for gcc to have a warning that rejects non-zero octal
>>> constants with the message "MISRA Rule 7.1: Octal constants shall not be
>>> used", even though it should be fairly straightforward (and highly
>>> desirable) for gcc to have a warning on the use of non-zero octal
>>> constants.
>> Well, there are the effective-c++ warnings that come from Scott Meyers'
>> (non-zero-cost) books.  so it must be possible to do something:
>> @item -Weffc++ @r{(C++ and Objective-C++ only)}
>> @opindex Weffc++
>> @opindex Wno-effc++
>> Warn about violations of the following style guidelines from Scott Meyers'
>> @cite{Effective C++} series of books:
> That warning needs a lot of improvement, or should be deprecated. It
> only warns about the guidelines in the first edition, many of which
> were improved or replaced entirely in later books. Some are completely
> inappropriate for C++11 and later.

Although that's beside the point. I agree that simply referring to
MISRA rules (without quoting chunks of text verbatim) is probably OK.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]