This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH c/c++] use explicit locations for some warnings in c-pragma.c
- From: Manuel LÃpez-IbÃÃez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>
- To: Mike Stump <mrs at mrs dot kithrup dot com>
- Cc: Christophe Lyon <christophe dot lyon at linaro dot org>, Marek Polacek <polacek at redhat dot com>, Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 21:02:15 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH c/c++] use explicit locations for some warnings in c-pragma.c
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAESRpQAss9wY48rxjsVC_VHn5c2bC+ZKf4m6fvL-ZNVFLkmKEA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150525195650 dot GY27320 at redhat dot com> <CAESRpQA=V4JmGTzOmJxgjCe+_mUMXdhMMVBnuGiDeW8LxOYi5A at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAKdteOYY1O50YLv7URgXX1Yiht=VPJvgT6Z8p2k6bUrDfb6pCw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAESRpQCe5=ih8-kw-kMg7v+rxLHbfdr3VtGAfbyyPFJ=Fez+aQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <9BCE0DCA-FF55-4C94-ADA0-78AAE57CA26B at mrs dot kithrup dot com>
On 4 November 2015 at 09:45, Mike Stump <mrs@mrs.kithrup.com> wrote:
> in the top of the tree. This is bad as the same line appears in a PASS: and an XFAIL:. Each test case should be unique. Should it be updated to 64?
I think it is sufficient to change it to:
/* { dg-warning "24:missing" "wrong column" { xfail *-*-* } 2 } */
This dg-warning is there to show that the column number is wrong and
tell whoever fixes this that there is already a test that only needs
updating. Changing 24 to 64 defeats the purpose of having it in the
first place.
Cheers,
Manuel.