* Sam James: > Florian Weimer <fwei...@redhat.com> writes: > >> Most -Wimplicit-int warnings were unconditionally disabled for system >> headers. Only missing types for parameters in old-style function >> definitions resulted in warnings. This is inconsistent with the >> treatment of other permerrors, which are active in system headers. > > The situation with system headers is kind of a mess still. I went > looking for a bug for the -Wimplicit-int behaviour but I only found > PR78000 for -Wimplicit-function-declaration. But in the bug, Joseph > makes the same observation. > > I don't suppose he'll want to block on that at this late point though. > > Do you know offhand what Clang's behaviour is wrt warnings in system > headers?
Clang ignores these new errors in system headers by default. I don't know if that's deliberate or a bug. Our permerrors are deliberately active in system headers. As the test shows, -Wimplicit-int really was the outlier here because of that check outside the permerror machinery. I expect system headers are quite clean actually because they have to be for C++ compatibility. Some things have improved in the last 25 years. Thanks, Florian
