[Bug c/60100] New: warning disappears when preprocessed source is compiled
lavr at ncbi dot nlm.nih.gov
gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Thu Feb 6 19:32:00 GMT 2014
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60100
Bug ID: 60100
Summary: warning disappears when preprocessed source is
compiled
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: lavr at ncbi dot nlm.nih.gov
Created attachment 32070
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32070&action=edit
GCC specs are attached
Hello,
When compiling the attached C code with GCC 4.8.1, I see a warning (which is
correct) that the callback signature mismatches what's expected in the argument
of BUF_PeekAtCB() call. If however, the source is first preprocessed then
compiled, there is no warning! Since distcc uses precompiled source, the
disappearing warning is a bad thing because it hides potential (and real, such
as this case) bugs.
$ cat qq.h
#include <stddef.h>
typedef struct SBUF* BUF;
extern size_t BUF_PeekAtCB
(BUF buf,
size_t pos,
size_t (*callback)(void* cbdata, const void* buf, size_t size),
void* cbdata,
size_t size
);
$ cat qq.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include "qq.h"
size_t cb(void* a, void* b, size_t c, int d)
{
return c;
}
int main()
{
BUF b = 0;
size_t n = BUF_PeekAtCB(b, 0, cb, 0, 512);
printf("%u\n", (unsigned int) n);
return 0;
}
$ gcc -Wall -c qq.c -o qq.o
qq.c: In function 'main':
qq.c:14:5: warning: passing argument 3 of 'BUF_PeekAtCB' from incompatible
pointer type [enabled by default]
size_t n = BUF_PeekAtCB(b, 0, cb, 0, 512);
^
In file included from qq.c:2:0:
qq.h:7:15: note: expected 'size_t (*)(void *, const void *, size_t)' but
argument is of type 'size_t (*)(void *, void *, size_t, int)'
extern size_t BUF_PeekAtCB
^
$ gcc -Wall -E qq.c -o qq.e
$ gcc -Wall -c qq.e -o qq.o
gcc: warning: qq.e: linker input file unused because linking not done
Also, I'm not sure why there is a bogus warning about linking here (and not
when
compiling right from the source file, above).
Any insight that you may have provide will be highly appreciated.
Thanks,
Anton Lavrentiev
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list