[C++] PATCH c++/17542
Gabriel Dos Reis
gdr@cs.tamu.edu
Fri Oct 29 17:03:00 GMT 2004
"Giovanni Bajo" <giovannibajo@libero.it> writes:
| Matt Austern wrote:
|
| > + if (declspecs->attributes)
| > + {
| > + cp_warning_at ("attribute ignored in declaration of %q#T", t);
| > + cp_warning_at ("attribute for %q#T must follow the class key",
| > t);
| > + }
|
| I would think that 'class key' is a legal term which is not common in C++
| development. Probably saying "enum/class/struct keyword" is a little easier to
| follow.
I disagree. If we really want to be anal precise about it, we should
be displaying the real class-key written by user.
| Also, I reckon the second line should be an inform() but do we have
| cp_inform_at?
No, we don't. I'm not sure we want to increate the number of xxx_at
functions. I was under the impression that Zack wanted to come up
with something different. Is my memory failing?
-- Gaby
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list