This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics


On 13/03/2008, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
> "Manuel López-Ibáñez" <lopezibanez@gmail.com> writes:
>
>
> > On 08/03/2008, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> 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
>  operator.
>

Why? Isn't the operator available at that point?

Cheers,

Manuel.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]