code that could be improved
Joseph S. Myers
jsm@polyomino.org.uk
Tue Mar 2 12:58:00 GMT 2004
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> I don't think that default would be appropriate. There are common
> situations where we want to say
>
> "fubar '%D::%T' is foo and bar"
That seems quite rare; the bulk of uses are quoted on their own and there
are a few cases that are unquoted for no obvious reason.
decl.c: error ("explicit specialization of %D after first use",
decl.c: error ("duplicate initialization of %D", decl);
parser.c: error ("%D redeclared with different access", decl);
pt.c: error ("specialization of %D after instantiation",
> | %` for a left quote (' in C locale)
> | %' for a right quote (' in C locale)
> | %qs for quoted string
> | %qD for unquoted decl
>
> I would prefer a simple
>
> %q for quoted tree or string
>
> There is no conceptual difference when a tree or string literal is
> reported in diagnostics.
We need %` and %' for all the cases such as '%D::%T' you gave where more
than a single format specifier is quoted. But where a single specifier is
quoted, there is a case for consistency in use of %q even if this does
mean almost all uses of %D become %qD.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm@polyomino.org.uk
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list