David Malcolm writes: > A user filed a bug about a bad location in a warning. It was marked as > an "easyhack" in bugzilla, and I had a go at fixing it. > > I though it may be useful for new GCC developers if I document what I > did to fix it. > > FWIW, the bug was PR c/71610 > i.e. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71610) > ("Improve location for "warning: ISO C restricts enumerator values to > range of 'int' [-Wpedantic]"?"). > > > Step 1: create a minimal reproducer for the diagnostic > > This was easy for this bug: I copied it from the bug report. Try to > avoid #include if possible; start with the simplest possible reproducer > (to minimize effort in the debugger), and work from there. > > If you're working on a bug in our bugzilla it's good to click on the > "take" button next to "Assignee" to mark yourself as assignee, and to > set the status to ASSIGNED, so that we don't duplicate effort. > > > Step 2: create a file under the relevant subdirectory of gcc/testsuite. > > This will be under one of gcc.dg, g++.dg or c-c++-common. If possible, > create it under c-c++-common so that we can test both the C and C++ > frontends. > > I created a file called "pr71610.c" under c-c++-common. (If this was > for a specific warning, the name of the warning may have been better, > but my case was part of "-Wpedantic", which is too broad for a testcase > title). > > > Step 3: run the reproducer under DejaGnu > > With a freshly built gcc, I ran the following from the "gcc" build > directory: > > make -jN -k && make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="-v -v dg.exp=pr71610*" >
Worth mentioning that you need to configure/make with CXXFLAGS or BOOT_* flags set to -O0 -g3 so that breakpoints actually work? Regards Senthil
