Re: [PATCH] caret diagnostics

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> > Yes, I agree, we need multiple things: accurate locations from the
> > front ends (ideally macro-expansion-aware), start- and end-locations,
> > better diagnostic output of various kinds, perhaps smarter location
> > handling in the optimizations, and of course finally column output in
> > dwarf.  I hope that covers the 80% of stuff we all seem to agree on.
>
> Regarding the list of improvements, I think most of the benefits from 
> caret diagnostics can be gained simply by printing accurate texts of 
> expressions (or declarations etc.) within the existing one-line diagnostic 
> messages, without needing major and incompatible stylistic changes.

Indeed.  The important thing is not the caret per se; it's having 
accurate line/column information for diagnostics and using the text the 
user wrote, rather than trying to reconstruct expressions.  The caret 
output format may be desirable to some users as well, but most of the 
work here will be in getting the locations correct and in showing the 
user's original text.

--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713