> On Oct 4, 2015, at 7:41 AM, Peter Wu <pe...@lekensteyn.nl> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:15:12AM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 1, 2015, at 9:53 AM, Alexis La Goutte <alexis.lagou...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, there is a "warning" with GCC from some month...
>>>
>>> ../../epan/proto.h:2740:54: warning: anonymous variadic macros were
>>> introduced in C99 [-Wvariadic-macros]
>>
>> Perhaps we need to turn on the "use C99" flag for some compilers,
>> including, but not limited to, GCC-compatible compilers, to suppress
>> warnings or even errors.
>
> The feature seems supported even in c90 mode on gcc 5.2.0 and clang
> 3.7.0. After reading the gcc manual page, I've decided to settle with
> -Wno-variadic-macros.
And, from 2012:
https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev/201209/msg00144.html
where "they" refers to variadic macros:
> They're supported with Microsoft's compilers at least as far back as Visual
> Studio 2005:
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms177415(v=vs.80).aspx
>
> There's no earlier version of the documentation offered by the "Other
> Versions" dropdown, but I don't know whether that means "earlier compilers,
> such as MSVC 6, didn't support them" or "we don't have the MSVC 6
> documentation online". This page:
>
>
> http://bytes.com/topic/c/answers/220087-macros-variable-parameter-list-ms-vc-compiler-6-0-a
>
> has a claim that MSVC 6 didn't support variadic macros. If that's the case,
> I don't personally have a problem with kicking MSVC 6 to the curb; we may
> already have done so in the documentation, as
>
> http://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsdg_html_chunked/ChToolsMSChain.html
>
> only mentions it when it says "The official Wireshark 1.8.x releases are
> compiled using Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 SP1. The official 1.2, 1.4, and 1.6
> releases are and were compiled using Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 SP1. Other
> past releases, including the 1.0 branch, were compiled using Microsoft Visual
> C++ 6.0.", and doesn't at all discuss using MSVC++ 6.
>
> I don't know what other compilers, such as Sun C^WOracle Solaris Studio, HP's
> ANSI C compiler, or IBM's XL C support. My *guess* is that older versions of
> those compilers may not have supported them but that they've all up-to-date
> with C99 features.
>
> Sun C fully supported C99 as of Sun Studio 12 (not to be confused with Sun
> Studio, Memphis :-)):
>
> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19205-01/820-4155/c.html#about
>
> *if* you specify -xc99; I don't know whether it or later versions support
> variadic macros without -xc99 or whether earlier versions supported them.
>
> IBM C for AIX fully supported C99 as of V6.0 in 2002:
>
>
> http://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/cgi-bin/ssialias?infotype=an&subtype=ca&supplier=897&appname=IBMLinkRedirect&letternum=ENUS202-161
>
> and XL C for AIX
>
> http://www-01.ibm.com/software/awdtools/xlcpp/aix/features/
>
> supports C99 now (with no indication in the document of when it started, but
> the Wikipedia page for C99, whence I got these references, says it started
> with V11.1). I don't know whether either of them have separate C89 and C99
> modes (which they might, for the benefit of those developing code that needs
> to build on C89 compilers) or whether, in C89 mode, they support extensions
> such as variadic macros. Given that one of IBM's compilers is the reason why
> we ban // comments - it disallows them by default - I suspect that, when not
> running in C99 (or C11?) mode, they do not support them.
>
> The HP ANSI C compiler supports C99 at least as of A.06.25
>
>
> http://h21007.www2.hp.com/portal/download/files/unprot/aCxx/Online_Help/getstarted.htm
>
> I don't know whether it has separate C89 and C99 modes (which they might, for
> the benefit of those developing code that needs to build on C89 compilers) or
> whether, in C89 mode, it supports extensions such as variadic macros.
>
>> P.S. Are there any other C99 features that we forbid that are actually
>> supported by supposedly C89-only compilers like MSVC?
>
> // comments are, I think, supported by MSVC; I don't know whether any UN*X C
> compilers support them without being told to run in C99 or C11 (or "GCC
> compatible"?) mode.
>
> Turning on "full C99" mode for compilers does run the risk of people using
> C99 features *not* supported by MSVC++ and not having them discovered until
> the build breaks.
At this point, given Microsoft's apparently-renewed interest in C99, I'd say we
should, for all compilers, turn on whatever flags are needed to support
variadic macros and // comments, and if that means not catching some C99
features not supported by MSVC++ prior to the latest version, so be it.
So, yeah, let's go for -Wno-variadic-macros. I may try running the 2.0-rc1
source tarball through the compilers on The Written Word's machines and, if
anything breaks, see if there are compiler flags that need to be turned on.
> Patch is at https://code.wireshark.org/review/10781
I've reviewed it +2 and submitted it, so it should be in 2.0-rc1 (or rc0 or
whatever Gerald calls it).
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
