This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [C++ Patch] PR 49152
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Paolo Carlini <email@example.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Marc Glisse<firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>>> 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).
>>> I may have forgotten the details, but looking at the beginning of the PR,
>>> don't we always want the types?
> Ok, then do I understand correctly that we want something like the below?
> First, If the caret is not active, we print the reconstructed expression.
> Then always the types.
> I *think* things are fine translation-wise (I generated and inspected
> gcc.pot) and otherwise patch regtests fine on x86_64-linux (well, by
> default, when the caret is active, the behavior should be identical to what
> I posted about a month ago)
Yes. Please document op_error_string. Patch OK with that.