YaniMan wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Maybe you got this type of mails, but maybe not. So i send it. :)
Hey! Maybe you got this type of replies, but maybe not. So I send it too!
:)
> Could you put an option into the compiler, to produce other error /
> warning outputs?
> The "file.c:line: error message" format is ok, but the stupid visual
> studio (which i use (good editor)) knows only the "file.c(line): error
> message" format. So it would be great, if i can switch to it.
You should be able to make it work something like this:
Index: gcc-3.3.3/gcc/cpperror.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/dlxtools/gcc-3.3.3/gcc/cpperror.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
diff -p -u -r1.1.1.1 cpperror.c
--- gcc-3.3.3/gcc/cpperror.c 26 Mar 2004 13:22:22 -0000 1.1.1.1
+++ gcc-3.3.3/gcc/cpperror.c 30 Nov 2005 16:39:13 -0000
@@ -56,9 +56,9 @@ print_location (pfile, line, col)
if (line == 0)
fprintf (stderr, "%s:", map->to_file);
else if (CPP_OPTION (pfile, show_column) == 0)
- fprintf (stderr, "%s:%u:", map->to_file, line);
+ fprintf (stderr, "%s(%u)", map->to_file, line);
else
- fprintf (stderr, "%s:%u:%u:", map->to_file, line, col);
+ fprintf (stderr, "%s(%u):%u:", map->to_file, line, col);
fputc (' ', stderr);
}
Index: gcc-3.3.3/gcc/diagnostic.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/dlxtools/gcc-3.3.3/gcc/diagnostic.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
diff -p -u -r1.1.1.1 diagnostic.c
--- gcc-3.3.3/gcc/diagnostic.c 26 Mar 2004 13:22:22 -0000 1.1.1.1
+++ gcc-3.3.3/gcc/diagnostic.c 30 Nov 2005 16:39:13 -0000
@@ -855,7 +855,7 @@ diagnostic_build_prefix (diagnostic)
abort();
return diagnostic->location.file
- ? build_message_string ("%s:%d: %s",
+ ? build_message_string ("%s(%d) %s",
diagnostic->location.file,
diagnostic->location.line,
_(diagnostic_kind_text[diagnostic->kind]))
That'll get 99% of the error/warning messages you're worried about.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
