Path: csiph.com!optima2.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder2.ecngs.de!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!local2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 01:59:17 -0500
From: Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Spurious diagnostic messages
References: <mja62k$df6$2@news.xmission.com> <mjl4t9$pgj$1@dont-email.me> <ab71ac94-14cd-4c6d-bc53-91da96572e5a@googlegroups.com> <874mn5ty3y.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <mjna5l$duf$1@dont-email.me> <ejevladml0ep58beoapn0sn3fog7pt4nnv@4ax.com> <87egm8qis7.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <kfnvbfi6nnp.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <mjss27$qjf$1@dont-email.me> <kfnoajk54c5.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <mnp57m$jpo$1@dont-email.me> <kfnk2u6woa2.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <mnrqg1$sos$1@dont-email.me> <kfnoajcp0gy.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <moamgm$hti$1@dont-email.me> <kfnio9eolth.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <mojadi$6g3$1@dont-email.me> <lnk2tufyq4.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <87615e4pf3.fsf@gmail.com> <ln4mkyfur2.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <55AD590C.4050002@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 07:59:17 +0100
Message-ID: <877fpukncq.fsf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9+8hD0BsaR/Kgs41kvMc72VNH78=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Lines: 19
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-2NFC1/e5XbLUmYB+xcTKf2iGp9B7DX71YNJ0m6mnWEJOrFpURCv/ZcsMHsdPhIRMXHbAdwylbUa/gOT!Rt0kdaDB9tYnTRryrjKLgwhhlQ2DxeDWgKovy3c1LF8qw9Fd3+yj7To/qO+KMcSuMdc7tg==
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2431
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:66086

James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:

> That's my understanding of the suggestion - or at least, it's the only
> way I can imagine that anything like this suggestion could actually be
> implemented. It's not clear to me whether Gareth thought that issue
> through. 

Ahhhh .... you may have a point there.  

I'd argue that the vast majority of printf() format specifiers _are_
known at compile time - string literals or one-of-may-string-literals --
and I'd be happy to have that extension for string literals only.

Runtime-variable format specifiers are a relative corner case.

> The format-string type checking he refers to only applies when the
> format string is a string literal.

Yes.