Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.c > #387546
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? |
| Date | 2024-08-13 13:00 -0700 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <877cckgplx.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <87zfpvfdk4.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86ttfp2zpf.fsf@linuxsc.com> <871q2tiffa.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86jzgl1gw6.fsf@linuxsc.com> <v9fes9$3rtc7$1@dont-email.me> |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
> On 13/08/2024 01:05, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>>>> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
>>>>> writes:
>>>>>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote at 17:56 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>>> gcc has the option "-Wwrite-strings" that makes string literals in
>>>>>>> C have "const char" array type, and thus give errors when you try
>>>>>>> to assign to a non-const char * pointer. But the option has to be
>>>>>>> specified explicitly (it is not in -Wall) because it changes the
>>>>>>> meaning of the code and can cause compatibility issues with
>>>>>>> existing correct code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Wwrite-strings is included in -Wpedantic.
>>>>>
>>>>> No it isn't, nor is it included in -Wall -- and it wouldn't make
>>>>> sense to do so.
>>>>>
>>>>> The -Wpedantic option is intended to produce all required
>>>>> diagnostics for the specified C standard. -Wwrite-strings
>>>>> gives string literals the type `const char[LENGTH]`, which
>>>>> enables useful diagnostics but is *non-conforming*.
>>>>
>>>> As long as the -Wwrite-strings diagnostics are only warnings the
>>>> result is still conforming.
>>>
>>> It's not just about diagnostics. This program:
>>>
>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>> int main(void) {
>>> puts(_Generic("hello",
>>> char*: "char*",
>>> const char*: "const char*",
>>> default: "?"));
>>> }
>>>
>>> must print "char*" in a conforming implementation. With
>>> (gcc|clang) -Wwrite-strings, it prints "const char*".
>> Good point. I hadn't considered such cases.
>>
>>> And something as simple as:
>>>
>>> char *p = "hello";
>>>
>>> is rejected with a fatal error with "-Wwrite-strings -pedantic-errors".
>> That violates the "As long as the -Wwrite-strings diagnostics are
>> only warnings" condition.
>
> Indeed.
>
> I personally think it is nice to have an option to make string
> literals "const" in C, even though it is non-conforming. I also think
> it is very useful to have a warning on attempts to write to string
> literals. But I think gcc has made a mistake here by conflating the
> two. I'd rather see the warning being enabled by default (or at least
> in -Wall), while the "make string literals const" option should
> require an explicit flag and be a "-f" flag rather than a "-W" flag.
> The current situation seems to be a quick-and-dirty way to get the
> warning.
>
> Other people may have different opinions, of course :-)
I agree. An alternative way to implement "-Wwrite-strings" might have
been to invent a new attribute that can be applied to string literal
objects. With the current "-Wwrite-strings", gcc marks string literal
objects as const, with all the non-conforming consequences that implies.
Instead, they could have added an attribute like say, "unwritable" that
triggers warnings but no other changes in semantics and no fatal errors
(unless you use -Werror, but then you're literally asking for it).
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Mark Summerfield <mark@qtrac.eu> - 2024-08-01 08:06 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Mark Summerfield <mark@qtrac.eu> - 2024-08-01 08:24 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-01 11:53 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-08-01 09:38 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Mark Summerfield <mark@qtrac.eu> - 2024-08-01 08:54 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-01 11:12 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 13:59 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-01 22:07 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 14:28 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-01 20:20 -0400
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-02 01:06 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-02 10:43 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 11:03 -0400
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-02 14:19 -0400
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-02 19:33 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-03 01:31 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 22:01 -0400
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2024-08-03 08:32 -0600
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-04 01:05 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 02:52 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-13 17:46 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-13 18:44 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-15 16:00 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-15 16:27 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-14 10:33 -0400
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-15 16:05 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-04 15:52 +0200
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 14:11 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-13 15:34 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-13 13:08 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-13 17:41 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-14 10:40 +0200
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-13 17:40 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-13 18:47 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-14 03:16 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-13 20:49 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-08-01 13:28 +0000
No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-01 17:40 +0300
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-01 19:56 +0200
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-08-02 05:30 +0000
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 03:02 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-08-02 13:04 +0100
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-02 09:59 -0400
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 11:24 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 14:42 -0400
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-02 14:58 -0400
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 15:11 -0400
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 08:32 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 08:27 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 12:27 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-02 23:29 +0100
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 16:11 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-05 02:06 +0100
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-04 19:37 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-04 19:38 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-05 12:03 +0100
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-05 13:35 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-05 21:54 +0100
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-05 15:39 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-06 12:29 +0100
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-06 12:48 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-06 23:59 +0100
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-12 16:18 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-05 15:44 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 14:38 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-12 14:55 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? dave_thompson_2@comcast.net - 2024-08-25 16:52 -0400
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-25 14:26 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 14:33 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-12 14:45 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 16:05 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-13 13:08 +0200
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-13 13:00 -0700
Re: No warning at implicit removal of const. Was: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-03 19:54 +0200
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-01 12:02 -0400
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-01 19:39 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-01 21:42 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 14:13 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-01 22:40 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-02 00:37 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-02 11:36 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 13:47 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-03 00:14 +0200
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-08-03 17:07 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-03 17:11 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-03 17:07 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-04 01:08 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-03 19:58 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-04 07:22 -0400
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 02:55 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-05 06:33 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-04 23:38 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-05 21:27 +0000
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-05 15:40 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-06 16:57 +0100
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-06 20:40 +0200
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-04 17:20 +0200
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 14:06 -0700
Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-13 17:43 -0700
csiph-web