Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Abstract Syntax Tree for C programs Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2019 12:39:12 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: <7cff3be5-0432-4a90-92ed-50c74cc1eb6b@googlegroups.com> <2220fa9d-4fea-4ea6-bb32-6843143322fb@googlegroups.com> <475067fe-369c-4246-84a1-05b1a3a0c6be@googlegroups.com> <5dd4672f-a571-40bc-bb1a-c14f6c631eb7@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2e0b7da47f6ad3e1490831b7250ade4a"; logging-data="7230"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Cg0rUmPz2xJ8hoa40FiCO" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:tc/72T6+zDDyq9prGg1ZlaSArL8= sha1:YCJgZ3WykqXijtBmM6JUe2m6K3c= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:144348 Bart writes: [...] > If I take the modified hello.c I mention below, with the implicit > printf() call, then 7 of these compilers will NOT return a hard error > that will halt compilation. Only my bcc. > > How do you get them that do that? With gcc/clang, the only way I can > think of off-hand is to use -Werror, but that will likely generate many > false positives, as gcc doesn't seem to know what is a serious problem, > and what is trivial. The relevant gcc/clang option has been mentioned repeatedly here, quite often in followups to your articles, most recently just 6 days ago. The last time I told you about it, you replied "I really don't care". It's "-pedantic-errors". Did you seriously forget that, or are you just trolling? (Note: I'm not asking for anyone else's opinion on whether Bart is trolling.) [...] -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org Will write code for food. void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */