------- Comment #6 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-13 12:51 ------- (In reply to comment #3) > I totally agree with David Faure, please make this warning controllable: > -Werror=invalid-offsetof > > All other warnings have a type that can be ignored, but when using the > -fdiagnostics-show-option option to see what the warning type is for this > non-POD warning I was amazed that it does not have a type. In the > gcc/Warnings-Options.html the type is listed as invalid-offsetof
I don't think the docs do say that. -Winvalid-offsetof may be related to non-POD types but is distinct from this error. (In reply to comment #5) > You have to read the relevant standard text carefully to determine whether > it is the program that is undefined, or a particular execution of the > program, in this particular instance of undefined behavior. If the > undefinedness is a property of the program (for example, ODR violation), > translation may be terminated. If the undefinedness is a property of a > particular execution of the program (for example, signed integer > overflow), translation may not be terminated unless all possible > executions of the program exhibit that undefined behavior. Passing a non-POD class type to a variadic function is a property of the program, detectable at compile time, so I think it would be conforming to make it an error (please correct me if I've misunderstood.) I don't feel strongly about making it always an error, but I disagree that this request is INVALID because the standard forbids making it an error. It seems like a valid enhancement to add a new warning option so this users can choose to make it an error. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19291
