On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:01 PM Martin Sebor <mse...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/11/2018 04:33 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > When gcc can't find a header file, it's a hard error that stops the build, > > typically requiring the user to mess around with compile flags, Makefiles, > > dependencies, and so forth. > > > > Often the exact search paths aren't obvious to the user. Consider the > > case where the include paths are injected via a tool such as pkg-config, > > such as e.g.: > > > > gcc $(pkg-config --cflags glib-2.0) demo.c > > > > This patch is an attempt at being more helpful for such cases. Given that > > the user can't proceed until the issue is resolved, I think it's reasonable > > to default to telling the user as much as possible about what happened. > > This patch list all of the search paths, and any close matches (e.g. for > > misspellings). > > > > Without the patch, the current behavior is: > > > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: fatal error: test-header.hpp: No such file or > > directory > > 1 | #include "test-header.hpp" > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > compilation terminated. > > > > With the patch, the user gets this output: > > > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: fatal error: test-header.hpp: No such file or > > directory > > 1 | #include "test-header.hpp" > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: paths searched: > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: path: '' > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: not found: 'test-header.hpp' > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: close match: 'test-header.h' > > 1 | #include "test-header.hpp" > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > | "test-header.h" > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: path: '/usr/include/glib-2.0' (via '-I') > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: not found: > > '/usr/include/glib-2.0/test-header.hpp' > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: path: '/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include' (via > > '-I') > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: not found: > > '/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include/test-header.hpp' > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: path: './include' (system directory) > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: not found: './include/test-header.hpp' > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: path: './include-fixed' (system > > directory) > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: not found: > > './include-fixed/test-header.hpp' > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: path: '/usr/local/include' (system > > directory) > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: not found: > > '/usr/local/include/test-header.hpp' > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: path: '/usr/include' (system directory) > > misspelled-header-1.c:1:10: note: not found: > > '/usr/include/test-header.hpp' > > compilation terminated. > > > > showing the paths that were tried, and why (e.g. the -I paths injected by > > the pkg-config invocation), and the .hpp vs .h issue (with a fix-it hint). > > > > It's verbose, but as I said above, the user can't proceed until they > > resolve it, so I think being verbose is appropriate here. > > > > Thoughts? > > I think printing the directories and especially the near matches > will be very helpful, especially for big projects with lots of -I > options. > > The output could be made substantially shorter, less repetitive, > and so easier to read -- basically cut in half -- by avoiding > most of the duplication and collapsing two notes into one, e.g. > like so: > > fatal error: test-header.hpp: No such file or directory > 1 | #include "test-header.hpp" > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > note: paths searched: > note: -I '.' > note: close match: 'test-header.h' > 1 | #include "test-header.hpp" > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > | "test-header.h" > note: -I '/usr/include/glib-2.0' > note: -I '/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include' > note: -isystem './include' > note: -isystem './include-fixed' > note: -isystem '/usr/local/include' > note: -isystem '/usr/include' > > or by printing the directories in sections: > > note: -I paths searched: > note: '.' > note: close match: 'test-header.h' > 1 | #include "test-header.hpp" > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > | "test-header.h" > note: '/usr/include/glib-2.0' > note: '/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include' > note: -isystem paths searched: > note: './include' > note: './include-fixed' > note: '/usr/local/include' > note: '/usr/include'
I agree that the "not found" lines are unnecessary; I don't feel strongly about the other formatting. Jason
