This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Clean up pretty printers [15/n]
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at axiomatics dot org>
- Cc: <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 19:59:29 +0000
- Subject: Re: Clean up pretty printers [15/n]
- References: <8738py71tx dot fsf at euclid dot axiomatics dot org> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1308251510450 dot 1471 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <878uzpg4t9 dot fsf at euclid dot axiomatics dot org> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1308251701580 dot 1471 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <87wqn91vyq dot fsf at euclid dot axiomatics dot org>
On Sun, 25 Aug 2013, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | Previously, each string was inside a separate call to M_() - the strings
> | themselves were the msgid parameters. Now, the msgid parameter is not a
> | single string but a more complicated expression and xgettext may not
> | handle such expressions properly the way it handles having just a single
> | string as parameter.
>
> OK, thanks the explanation.
>
> Do you think the same issue arise with diagnostic_set_info,
> diagnostic_append_note?
I don't see any problematic calls to those functions with this sort of
conditional expression.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com