Re: Fix for PR/13358

[Jack Lloyd <lloyd at randombit dot net>]

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Zack Weinberg wrote:

> Jack Lloyd <lloyd@randombit.net> writes:
> 
> > diff -u output is attached. Hopefully this is the correct format for gcc
> > patches: applies with patch -p0 < pr13358.patch from toplevel gcc
> > directory. This is based on Wednesday's snapshot but should be clean
> > against the current 3.4 branch.
> 
> Please also provide a test case properly formatted for gcc's
> testsuite.
> 
> zw
> 

As a start here is one I've been putting into g++.dg/warn. It sets
-Wno-long-long and tries to create three long long (decimal, hex, and
octal) without a suffix.

Would it be appropriate to also write one for expected failures that a)
sets -Wlong-long or b) doesn't set anything and assumes -Wlong-long is the
default?

I'm not sure that (b) is the right thing, but I'm willing to go along with
whatever is considered the best approach for testing.

-Jack

Attachment: Wlonglong-1.C
Description: Text document