On tor, 2011-07-07 at 00:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Is there a way to persuade gcc to complain about such extensions when > used in contexts where we don't know they work?
I don't think so. First of all, the comment in pg_config_manual.h says that we *want* the compiler to recognize %m as valid, and we apply the same attribute globally. And secondly, the difference between the gnu_printf attribute and the plain printf attribute is that the latter checks for what the target's C library accepts, which is equivalent to gnu_printf if you're on glibc, at least. According to the gcc source code, the target is supposed to override the conversion specifier list accordingly, but it looks like, for example, FreeBSD doesn't do that, which could be considered a bug there. The only override in the gcc source code itself is MinGW, which is where the whole trouble in pg_config_manual.h stems from in the first place. (Look for TARGET_OVERRIDES_FORMAT_ATTRIBUTES in the gcc source if you want to investigate.) There does not, unfortunately, appear to be an attribute that says to check conversion specifiers according to some standard (even though the internal structures of gcc appear to support that, but they'd currently have %m in the wrong category there anyway). -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
