From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] wt-status: use "format" function attribute for status_printf Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:44:37 -0400 Message-ID: <20130712204437.GC5276@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20130710001659.GA11643@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130710002328.GC19423@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vmwpvt28j.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20130710052859.GA5339@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vfvvjoj2h.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Matt Kraai , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jul 12 22:44:44 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UxkCp-0000Io-RV for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 22:44:44 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965439Ab3GLUok (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:44:40 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:42241 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965377Ab3GLUoj (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:44:39 -0400 Received: (qmail 25706 invoked by uid 102); 12 Jul 2013 20:45:58 -0000 Received: from c-98-244-76-202.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (98.244.76.202) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 15:45:58 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:44:37 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vfvvjoj2h.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 09:10:30AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > You can "fix" it with -Wno-zero-format-length, so the hassle is not > > huge. But I am also inclined to just drop this one. We have lived > > without the extra safety for a long time, and list review does tend to > > catch such problems in practice. > > I am tempted to actually merge the original one as-is without any of > the workaround, and just tell people to use -Wno-format-zero-length. Yeah, I think the only downside is the cognitive burden on individual developers who try -Wall and have to figure out that we need -Wno-zero-format-length (and that the warnings are not interesting). It would be nice to add it automatically to CFLAGS, but I do not know if we can reliably detect from the Makefile that we are compiling under gcc. -Peff