From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-63923-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 21558 invoked by alias); 22 May 2009 09:37:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 21550 invoked by uid 22791); 22 May 2009 09:37:22 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_43,J_CHICKENPOX_44,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout7.012.net.il (HELO mtaout7.012.net.il) (84.95.2.19)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 22 May 2009 09:37:15 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout7.012.net.il by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KK100K00H99Z100@i-mtaout7.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 22 May 2009 12:36:39 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.115.215]) by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KK100A55HD2F1E0@i-mtaout7.012.net.il>; Fri, 22 May 2009 12:36:39 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 09:37:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Prec/RFA] fix build error of prec in cygwin
In-reply-to: <daef60380905220142q2b20a1d8m75425eac3e654bd8@mail.gmail.com>
To: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83tz3do4wl.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20090518153510.GA23052@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20090521152621.GA27524@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <daef60380905210943n5e089918n2a4b7ade1f917a74@mail.gmail.com> <20090521173804.GA27866@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <daef60380905211614u2118b66did7cf783ae1b41bb0@mail.gmail.com> <20090522004623.GI28993@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <daef60380905211912y77feb416o4aeb40d82046d4d1@mail.gmail.com> <20090522041341.GA13509@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20090522060545.GA15680@adacore.com> <83ws89occi.fsf@gnu.org> <daef60380905220142q2b20a1d8m75425eac3e654bd8@mail.gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg00486.txt.bz2

> Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 16:42:06 +0800
> From: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> int
> main(int argc,char *argv[],char *envp[])
> {
> 	printf ("%uz", sizeof (int));
> 
> 	return (0);
> }
> 
> gcc -std=c89 -Wall -pedantic 1.c
> 
> No warning.

You are placing too much faith into -std= and -pedantic.  From the GCC
manual, node "Warning Options":

     Some users try to use `-pedantic' to check programs for strict ISO
     C conformance.  They soon find that it does not do quite what they
     want: it finds some non-ISO practices, but not all--only those for
     which ISO C _requires_ a diagnostic, and some others for which
     diagnostics have been added.

     A feature to report any failure to conform to ISO C might be
     useful in some instances, but would require considerable
     additional work and would be quite different from `-pedantic'.  We
     don't have plans to support such a feature in the near future.