aaron.ballman accepted this revision. aaron.ballman added a comment. In D131057#3697392 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131057#3697392>, @MaskRay wrote:
> ISTM adding the diagnostic (even if we do) is not so necessary in this patch. I tend to agree. I think we'll want such a diagnostic at some point, and I think it's fine to deviate from the warning group GCC uses. We already have diagnostic grouping patterns for this sort of thing and we should use those consistently. LGTM with some minor corrections to the release note. Thanks for this! ================ Comment at: clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:67-68 `Issue 50055: <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/50055>`_. +- ``-Wformat`` now recognizes ``%b`` for printf/scanf family functions and + ``%B`` for printf family functions. + `Issue 56885: <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/56885>`_. ---------------- Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D131057/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D131057 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
