This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc 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] assert.h: allow gcc to detect assert(a = 1) errors


On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/24/2016 03:21 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>>>
>>>> We *do* need that __STRICT_ANSI__ disjunct.
>>>> Otherwise, this would evoke no warning:
>>>>
>>>>   $ gcc -isystem. -I. -Werror=pedantic k.c
>>>>   In file included from k.c:1:0:
>>>>   k.c: In function ‘main’:
>>>>   k.c:2:23: warning: ISO C forbids braced-groups within expressions
>>>> [-Wpedantic]
>>>>    int main() { assert ( ({1;}) ); return 0; }
>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>>> Tests I ran manually in a directory with the new assert.h file:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Do you require a test suite addition for these? If so, would a single
>>>> bourne shell script be acceptable?
>>>
>>>
>>> We currently lack the machinery for that.  It's not just that it would need
>>> a shell script.  We also do not compile tests with headers as system
>>> headers.
>>>
>>> The patch looks good to me, but it needs a ChangeLog entry.
>>
>> Thanks for the review.
>> Here's a proposed ChangeLog entry:
>>
>> 2016-11-25  Jim Meyering  <meyering@fb.com>
>>
>>         Let gcc detect assert(a = 1) errors.
>>         * assert/assert.h (assert): Rewrite assert's definition so that a
>>         s/==/=/ typo, e.g., assert(errno = ENOENT) is not hidden from
>>         gcc's -Wparentheses by assert-added parentheses.  The new
>>         definition uses "if (expr) /* empty */; else __assert_fail...",
>>         so gcc -Wall will now detect that type of error in an assert, too.
>>         The __STRICT_ANSI__ disjunct is to avoid the warning that -Wpedantic
>>         would otherwise issue for the use of ({...}).  I would have preferred
>>         to use __extension__ to mark that, but doing so would mistakenly
>>         suppress warnings about any extension in the user-supplied "expr".
>>         E.g., "assert ( ({1;}) )" must continue to evoke a warning.
>>         https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1105335
>
> Here's the complete, rebased patch. Ok to push, presuming I still have
> commit access?

Friendly pre-holiday ping?


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