This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Re: bug 2645 and restrict

To: jason_merrill at redhat dot com
Subject: Re: bug 2645 and restrict
From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:08:24 -0700
Cc: gdr at codesourcery dot com, nathan at codesourcery dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
References: <m3bspjk872.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com><flu23by758.fsf@sel.cmla.ens-cachan.fr><m3lmonqhq6.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com>

>>>>> "Jason" == Jason Merrill <jason_merrill@redhat.com> writes:

>>>>> "Gabriel" == Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@codesourcery.com> writes:

    >> I don't agree. The description given by Nathan applies as well
    >> to volatile.

    Jason> I agree with Fergus that this is unfortunate.  But I
    Jason> suppose I'd be happy to accept __restrict__ in this
    Jason> situation with a warning.

Yes, that makes sense to me too.  (Same goes for volatile, actually.)
If we're ignoring the qualifier, issue a plain warning; a pedwarn is
too strong because that will halt compilation.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: bug 2645 and restrict
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: bug 2645 and restrict
  - From: Nathan Sidwell

References:
- Re: bug 2645 and restrict
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: bug 2645 and restrict
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: bug 2645 and restrict
  - From: Jason Merrill

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