https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80221
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Schwinge <tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #7)
> A more robust solution that wouldn't have to subject to a limit would be to
> add an annotation to dg-{error,message,warning} to indicate that the next
> dg-{bogus,error,message,warning} directive is meant to be applied to the
> same line as the current one. For instance, something like this:
Instead of working "into the future"...
> foobar;
> /* { dg-warning "warning for foobar" continue }
> { dg-warning "another warning for foobar" continue }
> { dg-error "error for foobar" } */
>
> (For brevity I omitted the comment and the { target ... } parts of the
> directives above. It would also be nice to be able to do away with those
> when they're not necessary.)
..., perhaps it's easier to implement that idea the other way round: at the end
of a "dg-*" handling routine, store the current location into a global
variable, and if a later "dg-*" directive uses a "continue" location, use the
value of the global variable instead. That is:
foobar;
/* { dg-warning "warning for foobar" .-1 }
Bla, bla, reasoning.
{ dg-warning "another warning for foobar" continue }
Bla, bla, more reasoning.
{ dg-error "error for foobar" continue } */
