Re: C++ err msgs

[Jason Merrill <jason at cygnus dot com>]

>>>>> Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@codesourcery.com> writes:

 > | Note that I have changed "unsigned int" to "unsigned"; only pedantry 
 > | insists on "unsigned int".  The "(" is directly adjacent to the function 
 > | name, according to universal industry convention.  

 > IIRC, there was a discussion about when and where departure from the
 > GNU standard coding is possible.  At the time, some us argued that
 > parts of the GNU standard coding as currently defined are not suitable
 > for C++.  Unless I'm mistaken the conclusion was the statu quo :-)
 > Perhaps should I add an option such as:

 >     -fdiagnostics-formating-rules=<your-standard>

 > where  <your-standard> may be one of
 >      gnu        (GNU Standard Coding)
 >      standard   (the style used in ISO 14882)

 > But I suspect that might not a good idea for the long time.

I wouldn't bother.  I'll stop objecting to this change--but we should add
C++ rules to the coding standards doc.

 > | ... The indentation
 > | doesn't try to line up the "unsigned" with the "(" because that is 
 > | rarely practical for C++.
 > | 
 > | I don't think there's any point in putting in code to insert a space 
 > | into ``>>'' in template-argument-list terminator sequences. 

 > Some people might find it helpful to be able to cut-and-paste without
 > any extra editorial changes.  Should we care?  Should we penalize
 > them? 

We should care.  We should emit correct C++.

Jason