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, rs6000] More diagnostic cleanup, addressing PR79845


On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 09:21:51AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> > On Aug 13, 2017, at 3:41 PM, Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> --- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-c.c	(revision 250965)
> >> +++ gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-c.c	(working copy)
> >> @@ -5812,7 +5812,7 @@ altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin (location_t loc
> >> 	 types.  */
> >>       if (nargs != 2)
> >> 	{
> >> -	  error ("vec_mul only accepts 2 arguments");
> >> +	  error ("builtin %qs only accepts 2 arguments", "vec_mul");
> > 
> > I don' meant to nit-pick too much but it has been drilled into me
> > that the term is built-in, not builtin.  There are a number of
> > deviations from this preferred spelling in GCC messages already
> > (mainly though not exclusively in the rs600 back-end) but I think
> > it would be nice to converge on the preferred spelling.
> 
> Martin, while I agree with you in principle, for now I have used up the time I
> have available for messing with diagnostics, so I'm going to go ahead with
> what we have for now.  Spelling patches are of course welcome. :-)

"built-in" as a noun is not a word (other than referring to furniture).
GCC uses "builtin" in all command line options and function names
already.  Also see https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-06/msg00774.html
(and there was a more recent discussion but I can't find it).

Patches of course welcome; in this particular case, "builtin" can just
be deleted, but that won't be true everywhere, it would be nice if error
messages stay consistent.


Segher


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