This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [C++ Patch] PR 49152
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
- Cc: Marc Glisse <marc dot glisse at inria dot fr>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 21:16:08 -0500
- Subject: Re: [C++ Patch] PR 49152
- References: <4F6A70C5.firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAAiZkiBLT0GtSD=QRwNPwWMyGyo+Vn7jd9mRf5R7BfNN_dMAQQ@mail.gmail.com> <4F6AFCF9.email@example.com> <alpine.DEB.firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAAiZkiDj+Mqe1YAwNFDwzSN_Mo-TEsMTHvTdaye9_BUaVmN7hA@mail.gmail.com> <4F8B7BCC.email@example.com>
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Paolo Carlini <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> .. hi all, hi Gaby,
> a couple of days ago, Manuel suggested in the audit trail of the main "caret
> diagnostics" PR, that now that we actually have got a form of it, the kind
> of change I proposed to resolve PR 49152 may make much more sense. In any
> case, my original patch still regtests fine today.
> What do you think?
a hybrid approach; I would suggest something like this: (a) if caret
is in effect, then print
the caret pointing to the symbol in question; otherwise (b) print the
symbol and the type (as suggested by Marc).
This is all best abstracted in a separate function.