@@ -1000,6 +1000,10 @@ Wsubobject-linkage
C++ ObjC++ Var(warn_subobject_linkage) Warning Init(1)
Warn if a class type has a base or a field whose type uses the anonymous namespace or depends on a type with no linkage.
+Wduplicate-decl-specifier
+C ObjC Var(warn_duplicate_decl_specifier) Warning LangEnabledBy(C ObjC,Wall)
+Warn when a variable declaration has duplicate const, volatile or restrict specifier.
+
ansi
C ObjC C++ ObjC++
A synonym for -std=c89 (for C) or -std=c++98 (for C++).
@@ -9539,21 +9539,25 @@ declspecs_add_qual (source_location loc,
gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (qual) == IDENTIFIER_NODE
&& C_IS_RESERVED_WORD (qual));
i = C_RID_CODE (qual);
+ location_t prev_loc = 0;
switch (i)
{
case RID_CONST:
dupe = specs->const_p;
specs->const_p = true;
+ prev_loc = specs->locations[cdw_const];
specs->locations[cdw_const] = loc;
break;
case RID_VOLATILE:
dupe = specs->volatile_p;
specs->volatile_p = true;
+ prev_loc = specs->locations[cdw_volatile];
specs->locations[cdw_volatile] = loc;
break;
case RID_RESTRICT:
dupe = specs->restrict_p;
specs->restrict_p = true;
+ prev_loc = specs->locations[cdw_restrict];
specs->locations[cdw_restrict] = loc;
break;
case RID_ATOMIC:
@@ -9564,7 +9568,17 @@ declspecs_add_qual (source_location loc,
gcc_unreachable ();
}
if (dupe)
- pedwarn_c90 (loc, OPT_Wpedantic, "duplicate %qE", qual);
+ {
+ bool warned = pedwarn_c90 (loc, OPT_Wpedantic,
+ "duplicate %qE declaration specifier", qual);
+ if (!warned
+ && warn_duplicate_decl_specifier
+ && prev_loc >= RESERVED_LOCATION_COUNT
+ && !from_macro_expansion_at (prev_loc)
+ && !from_macro_expansion_at (loc))
+ warning_at (loc, OPT_Wduplicate_decl_specifier,
+ "duplicate %qE declaration specifier", qual);
+ }
return specs;
}
@@ -71,11 +71,12 @@ pedwarn_c99 (location_t location, int opt, const char *gmsgid, ...)
ISO C99 but not supported in ISO C90, thus we explicitly don't pedwarn
when C99 is specified. (There is no flag_c90.) */
-void
+bool
pedwarn_c90 (location_t location, int opt, const char *gmsgid, ...)
{
diagnostic_info diagnostic;
va_list ap;
+ bool warned = false;
rich_location richloc (line_table, location);
va_start (ap, gmsgid);
@@ -92,6 +93,7 @@ pedwarn_c90 (location_t location, int opt, const char *gmsgid, ...)
? DK_PEDWARN : DK_WARNING);
diagnostic.option_index = opt;
report_diagnostic (&diagnostic);
+ warned = true;
goto out;
}
}
@@ -114,7 +116,9 @@ pedwarn_c90 (location_t location, int opt, const char *gmsgid, ...)
diagnostic_set_info (&diagnostic, gmsgid, &ap, &richloc, DK_PEDWARN);
diagnostic.option_index = opt;
report_diagnostic (&diagnostic);
+ warned = true;
}
out:
va_end (ap);
+ return warned;
}
@@ -716,7 +716,7 @@ extern void c_bind (location_t, tree, bool);
extern bool tag_exists_p (enum tree_code, tree);
/* In c-errors.c */
-extern void pedwarn_c90 (location_t, int opt, const char *, ...)
+extern bool pedwarn_c90 (location_t, int opt, const char *, ...)
ATTRIBUTE_GCC_DIAG(3,4);
extern bool pedwarn_c99 (location_t, int opt, const char *, ...)
ATTRIBUTE_GCC_DIAG(3,4);
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+/* PR43651 */
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options -Wduplicate-decl-specifier } */
+
+typedef const int CT1;
+#define CT2 const int
+typedef volatile int VT1;
+#define VT2 volatile int
+typedef char *restrict RT1;
+#define RT2 char *restrict
+
+void foo(void)
+{
+ const CT1 x1;
+ const CT2 x2;
+ CT1 const x3;
+ CT2 const x4;
+ const int const x5; /* { dg-warning "duplicate .const." } */
+ const int *const x6;
+ volatile VT1 y1;
+ volatile VT2 y2;
+ VT1 volatile y3;
+ VT2 volatile y4;
+ volatile int volatile y5; /* { dg-warning "duplicate .volatile." } */
+ volatile int *volatile y6;
+ RT1 restrict r1;
+ RT2 restrict r2;
+ restrict RT1 r3;
+ /* "restrict RT2" is invalid */
+ char *restrict restrict r4; /* { dg-warning "duplicate .restrict." } */
+ char *restrict *restrict r5;
+}
+
+void c1(const CT1 t) { }
+void c2(const CT2 t) { }
+void c3(CT1 const t) { }
+void c4(CT2 const t) { }
+void c5(const int const t) { } /* { dg-warning "duplicate .const." } */
+void v1(volatile VT1 t) { }
+void v2(volatile VT2 t) { }
+void v3(VT1 volatile t) { }
+void v4(VT2 volatile t) { }
+void v5(volatile int volatile t) { } /* { dg-warning "duplicate .volatile." } */
+void r1(restrict RT1 t) { }
+void r2(RT1 restrict t) { }
+void r3(RT2 restrict t) { }
+void r4(char *restrict restrict t) { } /* { dg-warning "duplicate .restrict." } */
+
+typedef const CT1 CCT1;
+typedef const CT2 CCT2;
+typedef CT1 const CT1C;
+typedef CT2 const CT2C;
+typedef const int const CIC; /* { dg-warning "duplicate .const." } */
+typedef volatile VT1 VVT1;
+typedef volatile VT2 VVT2;
+typedef VT1 volatile VT1V;
+typedef VT2 volatile VT2V;
+typedef volatile int volatile VIV; /* { dg-warning "duplicate .volatile." } */
+typedef RT1 restrict RT1R;
+typedef RT2 restrict RT2R;
+typedef restrict RT1 RRT1;
+typedef int *restrict restrict IRR; /* { dg-warning "duplicate .restrict." } */
Hi all! Currently GCC produces pedantic warning, if variable declaration (or typedef) has duplicate qualifier, but only when compiling as C89 (not C99 or C11). The attached patch adds a new warning option to enable the same warning in C99 and C11. It also checks whether qualifiers come from macro expansion, e.g.: #define CT2 const int const CT2 x1; CT2 const x2; and does not warn in this case, but warns for, e.g. void foo(const int const *x) { } (because this probably meant to be "const int *const x") The name for new option "-Wduplicate-decl-specifier" and wording was chosen to match the same option in Clang. Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux. OK for next stage 1?