Al Viro wrote: > On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 02:07:15AM -0700, Christopher Li wrote: >> I think some one report it long time ago. > > It should not accept those. Undefined behaviour and if you try to actually > define the semantics for it, you run into such a pile of corner cases that > it's not worth even trying. Do you think the cases handled by GCC warrant making an attempt and warning about it, or should Sparse just throw up its hands and give up? If the latter, should Sparse make any attempt at all to detect preprocessor conditionals in macro arguments so it can give a more specific warning? - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
