2.95.4 plans

[Kaveh R. Ghazi]

 > From: Bernd Schmidt <bernds@redhat.com>
 > 
 > On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
 > 
 > > The patch is that I'd like to apply the following from the mainline.
 > >
 > >  > 1999-11-30  Kaveh R. Ghazi  <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu>
 > >  >
 > >  >     * c-lex.c (yylex): With -Wtraditional, when the ANSI type of an
 > >  >       integer constant does not match the traditional type, limit the
 > >  >       warnings to cases where the base of the type is ten.
 > >  >
 > >  >     * invoke.texi (-Wtraditional): Document it.
 > >
 > > http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/c-lex.c.diff?r1=1.66&r2=1.67
 > > http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/invoke.texi.diff?r1=1.155&r2=1.156
 > >
 > 
 > Ok.
 > Bernd


Thanks, here's what I installed on the 2.95.x branch.


Index: ChangeLog
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog,v
retrieving revision 1.3667.4.340
diff -u -p -r1.3667.4.340 ChangeLog
--- ChangeLog	2001/03/20 19:51:49	1.3667.4.340
+++ ChangeLog	2001/03/20 23:48:49
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+Tue Mar 20 18:31:48 2001  Kaveh R. Ghazi  <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu>
+
+	1999-11-30  Kaveh R. Ghazi  <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu>
+        * c-lex.c (yylex): With -Wtraditional, when the ANSI type of an
+	integer constant does not match the traditional type, limit the
+	warnings to cases where the base of the type is ten.
+
+        * invoke.texi (-Wtraditional): Document it.
+
 2001-03-20  David O'Brien  <obrien@FreeBSD.org>
 
 	from 2000-07-12  Zack Weinberg  <zack@wolery.cumb.org>
Index: c-lex.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/c-lex.c,v
retrieving revision 1.49
diff -u -p -r1.49 c-lex.c
--- c-lex.c	1999/03/20 19:21:23	1.49
+++ c-lex.c	2001/03/20 23:48:50
@@ -1812,7 +1812,11 @@ yylex ()
 
 	    type = flag_traditional ? traditional_type : ansi_type;
 
-	    if (warn_traditional && traditional_type != ansi_type)
+	    /* We assume that constants specified in a non-decimal
+	       base are bit patterns, and that the programmer really
+	       meant what they wrote.  */
+	    if (warn_traditional && base == 10
+		&& traditional_type != ansi_type)
 	      {
 		if (TYPE_PRECISION (traditional_type)
 		    != TYPE_PRECISION (ansi_type))
Index: invoke.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/invoke.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.111.4.13
diff -u -p -r1.111.4.13 invoke.texi
--- invoke.texi	2001/01/25 14:03:17	1.111.4.13
+++ invoke.texi	2001/03/20 23:48:53
@@ -1694,6 +1694,12 @@ A @code{switch} statement has an operand
 @item
 A non-@code{static} function declaration follows a @code{static} one.
 This construct is not accepted by some traditional C compilers.
+
+@item
+The ANSI type of an integer constant has a different width or signedness
+from its traditional type.  This warning is only issued if the base of
+the constant is ten.  I.e. hexadecimal or octal values, which typically
+represent bit patterns, are not warned about.
 @end itemize
 
 @item -Wundef