> 1. There are legitimate use-cases where GCC's assumption does not hold, .e.g.:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> void foo( int a )
> {
> char hello0[] = "hello0";
foo.c line 5: warning: 'const' omitted
> char hello1[] = "hello1";
foo.c line 6: warning: 'const' omitted
>
> char *ptr;
foo.c line 8: warning: 'const' omitted
>
> switch (a % 2) {
> case 0: ptr = hello0;
> break;
> case 1: ptr = hello1;
> break;
> }
>
> printf( ptr );
> }
>
> => The warning GCC issues is plain wrong.
>
> => -Werror=format-security removes the functionality of assigning pointers to
> format strings even if they are constant.
The example does not support this argument because the example omitted the
'const' (three places.)
gcc-4.[89] isn't advanced enough to distinguish, but the example does not match
the argument.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
