This is the mail archive of the
gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
other/9071: Warning for blocks not closed in same file as opened in
- From: Matthias Klose <doko at net dot local>
- To: gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org, debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org
- Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:26:56 +0100
- Subject: other/9071: Warning for blocks not closed in same file as opened in
- Reply-to: 122103 at bugs dot debian dot org
>Number: 9071
>Category: other
>Synopsis: Warning for blocks not closed in same file as opened in
>Confidential: no
>Severity: non-critical
>Priority: low
>Responsible: unassigned
>State: open
>Class: change-request
>Submitter-Id: net
>Arrival-Date: Fri Dec 27 15:36:01 PST 2002
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>
>Release: 3.2.1 (Debian) (Debian unstable)
>Organization:
The Debian Project
>Environment:
System: Debian GNU/Linux (unstable)
Architecture: i686
host: i386-linux
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --enable-languages=c,c++,java,f77,proto,pascal,objc,ada --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/3.2 --enable-shared --with-system-zlib --enable-nls --without-included-gettext --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-java-gc=boehm --enable-objc-gc i386-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.2.2 20021212 (Debian prerelease)
>Description:
[ Reported to the Debian BTS as report #122103.
Please CC 122103@bugs.debian.org on replies.
Log of report can be found at http://bugs.debian.org/122103 ]
Accidentally leaving the close brace off of a block in e.g., a header
file will often result in errors in files that include it, without any
indication of what is wrong. For example, leaving a namespace open will
usually just give a parse error at the end of the including file.
I'd appreciate it if a warning were issued at the end of a file if there
are still any blocks open.
I realize that leaving a block open through a file ending is not a
violation of the ISO standard's letter or spirit; however, I believe it
is usually a mistake, and one that is otherwise hard to track down. A
compiler warning would make tracking it down much easier, and is
unlikely to give any false alarms.
>How-To-Repeat:
>Fix:
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: