This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: Named warnings
- From: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- To: mark at codesourcery dot com, neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk
- Cc: dj at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, shebs at apple dot com
- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 22:21:35 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: RFC: Named warnings
> For example, the current trigraph warnings explicitly contain the
> trigraph. That's unnecessary when a caret is pointing right at it.
> Similarly for all the union/struct/enum separated diagnostics in the
> front end at the moment.
I would not be too hasty in this assessment. GNAT does an excellent job of
placing warnings in exactly the right place, but we still find most people
prefer to work in brief error message mode without the carets, so it is
still useful to have appropriate redundant insertions in the messages.