Re: [PATCH][stage1] Wrap option names in gcc internal messages with %< and %>.

[Martin Liška <mliska at suse dot cz>]

On 3/11/19 9:30 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 09:13:57AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>> The patch adds a lot of option name wrapping in string format messages. I added a new contrib
>> script (contrib/check-internal-format-escaping.py) that is parsing gcc.pot file and reports
>> errors.
>>
>> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
>> Apart from that I built all cross compilers and compared all warnings so that
>> I don't introduce a bootstrap error. It's expected that various target-specific
>> tests will need wrapping in scanned patterns.
>>
>> Is it fine for next stage1?
> 
> Generally looks good to me, but I'm not sure about corner cases like:
> %<-misr-secure=X%>, shouldn't the X be after %>?  X is not what users would
> type.  Or reword these to %<-misr-secure=%s%> argument not in between 0 and
> 23 or similar.

Well, in order to make it consistent, I would put the closing '%>' after
the whole option=argument expression.

> 
> On the other side:
> %<-mcpu%>=%s conflicts with %<-march%>=%s
> the =%s should be before %>.
> Same with %<-mrgf-banked-regs%>=%s .
> 
> Similarly
> %<-mstringop-strategy=rep%>_8byte
> or
> %<-mcpu=v8%>.30.a
> or
> %<-mfloat128%>-hardware
> look wrong.

I'm going to fix all these.

> 
> Don't we want to commit it now (after fixing above issues), rather than
> waiting for stage1?  We have changed tons of translations recently and this
> is something that the translators have been asking for a long time, we need
> to upload new gcc.pot anyway and let them adjust translations, plus your
> it will be hard to maintain your patch for another month or two.

I would be happy to get it in right now. Yes, patch conflicts would happen
during the time. I'll send updated version as a reply for the second
Jakub's email.

Martin

> 
> 	Jakub
>