Re: Preprocessor keyword #echo is missing

["J. Grant" <jg-web at jguk dot org>]

Hello zw,

Thanks for the reply.

> > platsdl.c:221:2: warning: #warning start (PLATFORM_WSDL ||
> > PLATFORM_LSDL) block
> ...
>
> > Yes, the extra text is "warning: #warning"
> > Something like as follows would be useful and not take up extra space
> > in the output.
> >
> > platsdl.c:221:2: start (PLATFORM_WSDL || PLATFORM_LSDL) block
>
> Frankly I do not consider the elimination of that extra text to be
> sufficient justification for adding another directive.  You can do
> gcc ... 2>&1 | sed -e 's/warning: #warning //' if it really bugs you.
I am using this currently, an #echo solution would be a better way to 
resolve this though.

> If this is for your own personal testing, why does it matter whether
> it is formally correct to call it a warning?  You get the message on
> your tty and compilation proceeds; that's what matters.
It would be useful in other situations than testing, Makefiles are full 
of "echo" calls, however there is no ideal solution for the preprocessor.


> > > What other compilers are you familiar with that support #echo?
> ...
>
> > http://falcon.rdo.vcu.edu/~mcnpinfo/dcomment/manual/node5.html
>
> This is specifically *not* a C preprocessor, it's a generic file
> processor with a similar control language.
OK, well would you consider that #echo would be a useful addition to the 
GCC preprocessor language?  I personally do and I can not believe I am 
the only one who sees this gap that needs filling.

Regards

JG