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]

C/C++ diagnostics guidelines (was: Re: [C PATCH] Enable initializing statics with COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR in C99 (PR c/63567))


> The Right Thing is for -pedantic not to cause errors, only warnings
> (-pedantic-errors being needed for an error).  So rather than having this
> conditional for whether to allow the extension at all, make the
> conditional code do a pedwarn (if flag_isoc99, otherwise there will
> already have been one for using a compound literal at all, and not for
> VECTOR_TYPE).  (I don't believe this can affect the semantics of valid
> code; in this case of require_constant with a compound literal, we know
> the code is invalid in ISO C terms, so it's safe to diagnose it then
> interpret it in a sensible way.)

I think there is roughly consensus about how C/C++ diagnostics should
work, but it is easy to forget it since it is not really written
anywhere.

Thus, I drafted some guidelines
at:https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Better_Diagnostics#guidelines

Please, could you take a look and comment whether I got it right/wrong?
New items are very welcome!

Cheers,

Manuel.


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