C++ PATCH: Fix annoying space in formatting

Gabriel Dos Reis gdr@cs.tamu.edu
Mon Jun 28 08:19:00 GMT 2004


On Sun, 27 Jun 2004, Jason Merrill wrote:

| On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 16:33:14 -0500 (CDT), Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@cs.tamu.edu> wrote:
|
| > On Sun, 27 Jun 2004, Richard Henderson wrote:
| >
| > | On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 10:24:53AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > | > The long term solution, of course, is to
| > | > rewrite cp/error.c in terms of the new pretty-printer.
| > |
| > | How about rewriting the pretty printer such that it shares the bulk
| > | of its code in tree-pretty-print.c?
| >
| > The new pretty-printer was being rewritten when cp/error.c was
| > somehow copied and edited to produce tree-pretty-print.c.
|
| It wasn't.  AFAIK tree-pretty-print was written from scratch.

OK.  The ressemblance of

  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/txt00021.txt

with was then in cp/error.c led me under the impression that it was
copy-and-edit (I was also under the impression that I got a copy
by private mail from Sebastian).  Anyway it does not matter now.

| I had a patch long ago to improve it by copying over some code from
| cp/error.c, which I sent to you and another guy in hope that someone would
| finish the job of making the pretty printer more useful.  As I recall, the
| purpose of that patch was to fix the printing of complex C types (arrays,
| functions), which the current code doesn't really attempt to get right.

I remember your patch, and I believe I should be able to resurect it.
(Unfortunately, I can't have access to the machine that stores it, at
the moment).

| Since then I've been watching while you built this grand pretty-printing
| edifice, which is very nice and elegant, but so far it hasn't paid off in
| terms of actually fixing the glaring shortcomings of tree-pretty-print.

sorry for that.

| > Yes, at some point they should share code, but there was no
| > way for me to stop that error to happen (in time).  The long-term
| > solution for cp/error.c is to use cp/cxx-pretty-print.c. I suppose
| > the same will happen for tree-pretty-print.c and c-pretty-print.c.
|
| Is there any way for me to convince you to make the conversion of
| tree-pretty-print a higher priority?

You just did :-)
Obvisouly, I have not been using tree-pretty-print.c to notice its
deficiency.  I'll bump its priority.

-- Gaby



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list