This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics
On 08/03/2008, Ian Lance Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Another approach would be to only use the carets for parse errors,
> which is where they are the most helpful. For a middle-end error like
> "assuming signed overflow does not occur when simplifying
> multiplication" a caret pointer might be more misleading than
> otherwise, as one thing we know for sure is that it would not point at
> a multiplication operator.
I don't get this. So, what is it pointing to?