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: [PATCH][C++] Fix PR60761, diagnostics in clones

From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Cc: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 14:10:04 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH][C++] Fix PR60761, diagnostics in clones
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 11 dot 1404081353460 dot 31108 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr> <534439DC dot 5090902 at redhat dot com> <5ff1e44b-c61a-49a2-aa58-e487658737f4 at email dot android dot com>

On 04/09/2014 04:21 AM, Richard Biener wrote:

The names of the in-charge and not-in-charge constructor clones are
complete_ctor_identifier and base_ctor_identifier (and dtor for
destructors); you could check for those.


I was more asking for how we present those To the user in diagnostics. I wanted to use a consistent 'quoting' style. If using <clone> is fine then I'll just stick to that.

I think saying <complete> and <base> would be helpful for distinguishingthem.


Jason

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH][C++] Fix PR60761, diagnostics in clones
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

References:
- [PATCH][C++] Fix PR60761, diagnostics in clones
  - From: Richard Biener
- Re: [PATCH][C++] Fix PR60761, diagnostics in clones
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [PATCH][C++] Fix PR60761, diagnostics in clones
  - From: Richard Biener

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