This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org 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: [PATCH 11/13] Fix va_start related location


Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> writes:

> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Dodji Seketeli <dodji@redhat.com> wrote:
>> In gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr30457.c, the first warning was not being
>> emitted because the relevant location was inside the var_start macro
>> defined in a system header. ÂIt can even point to a token for a
>> builtin macro there. ÂThis patch unwinds to the first token in real
>> source code in that case.
>
> While you are at it, could you also use a non-zero value for the second
> argument argument to warning_at?

I couldn't find any obvious value for it.  I am thinking maybe it would
make sense to introduction a new -Wva_start to warn about possible
dangerous uses of the va_start macro and use that as the second argument
for the relevant warnings emitted by fold_builtin_next_arg.  What do you
think?

In any case, this topic seems logically unrelated to the purpose of
enable -ftrack-macro-expansion by default, so IMHO it would be better to
do this in a separate self contain patch.  Among other things, this
would ease possible future back-ports.  Would you agree?

Thanks.

-- 
		Dodji


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