[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