Thank you for the suggestion.
> On May 26, 2023, at 1:59 PM, Joseph Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 25 May 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> 
>>> On May 25, 2023, at 4:51 PM, Joseph Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> The documentation in this case is OK, though claims about how a future 
>>> version will behave have a poor track record (we tend to end up with such 
>>> claims persisting in the documentation even though the change in question 
>>> didn't get made and might sometimes no longer be considered desirable).
>> Then, do you have any suggestions on this claim? Shall we delete it from 
>> the doc? Or keep it?
> 
> My suggestion would be just to say the feature is deprecated without 
> saying what a future version will do - 

I will modify the doc as:

diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index 17ef80e75cc..e8a8be93ff1 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -1792,8 +1792,8 @@ consistently.  Any code relying on this case should be 
modified to ensure
 that flexible array members only end up at the ends of structures.
 
 Please use the warning option @option{-Wflex-array-member-not-at-end} to
-identify all such cases in the source code and modify them.  This warning
-will be on by default starting from GCC 15.
+identify all such cases in the source code and modify them.  This extension
+is now deprecated.
 @end itemize
 
Let me know if you have see any issue with the above.


> also make sure to say it's 
> deprecated in the GCC 14 release notes, and then if GCC 15 starts to warn, 
> put something in the GCC 15 release notes as well.

Okay, will add this to my todo list.

Another question:   is it better for me to rearrange the Patch 1/2 and Patch 
2/2 a little bit, 
to put the FE , doc change and corresponding testing case together into one 
patch, (you have approved the FE part of change in Patch 1/2).
and then the mid-end change to tree-ojbect-size.cc and the corresponding 
testing cases to another patch?


Thank you!

Qing
> 
> -- 
> Joseph S. Myers
> jos...@codesourcery.com

Reply via email to