[Bug translation/90149] diagnostics containing BIT_FIELD_REF don't conform to diagnostics guideline

rguenther at suse dot de gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Sat May 11 07:21:00 GMT 2019


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90149

--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On May 10, 2019 10:34:03 PM GMT+02:00, "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org"
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90149
>
>Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
>
>           What    |Removed                     |Added
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
> Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
>
>--- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
>I'm replacing all the tree codes with %qs and get_tree_code_name
>(TREE_CODE
>(expr)), like so:
>
>@@ -3072,13 +3073,15 @@ verify_types_in_gimple_reference (tree expr,
>bool
>requir
>e_lvalue)
>                                size))
>            {
>              error ("mode size of non-integral result does not "
>-                    "match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF");
>+                    "match field size of %qs",
>+                    get_tree_code_name (TREE_CODE (expr)));
>              return true;
>            }
>          if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (op))
>              && !type_has_mode_precision_p (TREE_TYPE (op)))
>            {
>-             error ("BIT_FIELD_REF of non-mode-precision operand");
>+             error ("%qs of non-mode-precision operand",
>+                    get_tree_code_name (TREE_CODE (expr)));
>              return true;
>            }
>          if (!AGGREGATE_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (op))

That looks excessive for code size. Why not just quote the names appropriately?


More information about the Gcc-bugs mailing list