[PATCH] D47290: [Sema] -Wformat-pedantic only for NSInteger/NSUInteger %zu/%zi on Darwin

[Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

aaron.ballman added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47290#1124991, @hans wrote:

> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47290#1124964, @aaron.ballman wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47290#1124956, @hans wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47290#1124933, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> > >
> > > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47290#1124866, @hans wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If we really want to special-case NSInteger, and given that you're targeting a specific wide-spread pattern maybe that's the right thing to do, I think we should make -Wformat accept (move the warning behind -Wformat-pedantic I suppose) printing NSInteger with *any* integral type of the right size, not just size_t.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Would you be similarly okay with %ld and %d on Windows platforms when mixing up int and long?
> > >
> > >
> > > No, I'm against a general relaxation of -Wformat, but to solve JF's problem I think special-casing NSInteger might be reasonable.
> >
> >
> > How is JF's problem different?
>
>
> It concerns a vendor-specific type. Of course I personally think it would be better if the code could be fixed, but it doesn't sound like that's an option so then I think special-casing for NSInteger is an acceptable solution.


Okay, that's fair, but the vendor-specific type for my Windows example is spelled `DWORD`. I'm really worried that this special case will become a precedent and we'll wind up with -Wformat being relaxed for everything based on the same rationale. If that's how the community wants -Wformat to work, cool, but I'd like to know if we're intending to change (what I see as) the design of this warning.


Repository:
  rC Clang

https://reviews.llvm.org/D47290