On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Ian suggested that we delete this information after the FE is > > finished. This makes sense, I think, from a memory-saving > > perspective. But, that means we will get different kinds of error > > output depending on when a diagnostic is emitted, which I think is > > pretty unfriendly -- it exposes implementation details of gcc to the > > user. > > I think that is mostly OK in practice because most diagnostics are > issued by the front end. But I admit that some come from the > middle-end, so there would be an inconsistency.
There are a number of people (including me) who believe that diagnostics from the middle end are oddities. Not everybody is of that opinion, but I would argue that we should not encourage diagnostics from the middle end.
