This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics
On 13/03/2008, Ian Lance Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> "Manuel López-Ibáñez" <email@example.com> writes:
> > On 08/03/2008, Ian Lance Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> Another approach would be to only use the carets for parse errors,
> >> which is where they are the most helpful. For a middle-end error like
> >> "assuming signed overflow does not occur when simplifying
> >> multiplication" a caret pointer might be more misleading than
> >> otherwise, as one thing we know for sure is that it would not point at
> >> a multiplication operator.
> > I don't get this. So, what is it pointing to?
> I don't know for sure. I would guess that it would point to the start
> of the statement in which the overflow is found. The warning is going
> to use the location from some statement being simplified, not from the
Why? Isn't the operator available at that point?