This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: RFA [PR objc/29200][diagnostic] Make diagnostics translation friendly


On Thu, 9 Apr 2009, David Ayers wrote:

> > As a separate issue, it looks like this diagnostic is an informative 
> > message that should use "inform" not "warning".
> 
> The selection of the wrong method signature can lead to the caller
> misinterpreting the parameters or the callee misinterpreting the return
> type.  So I believe the issue as a whole should be treated as a warning.
> 
> Yet we already emit a separate warning for the issue and the subsequent
> calls to warn_with_method merely add supplementary information.  So
> treating these subsequent messages as informative messages seems
> appropriate.  Is that what you were referring to?

Yes.  There is an error or warning, and then subsequent messages adding 
supplementary information should use "inform".

> It seems that the test suite doesn't differentiate between warning and
> inform, so there is no need to adapt anything there.

I think "inform" calls need dg-message instead of dg-warning, but maybe 
ObjC tests don't distinguish errors/warnings/informs yet (some languages 
do).

> I'm bootstrapping this on i686-pc-gnu-linux.
> OK for trunk if that and regression tests pass?

OK unless ObjC maintainers object, but please add the missing space before 
the open parenthesis in calls to gen_method_decl (gen_method_decl (meth) 
not gen_method_decl(meth)).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


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