On Friday 17 March 2017 12:28:48 Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 17 March 2017 at 12:17, Frédéric Marchal wrote: > > On Friday 17 March 2017 13:32:17 Janne Blomqvist wrote: > >> Not my area of expertise, but it seems the Glorious Future (TM) in > >> this area is something called the "language server protocol", see > >> http://langserver.org/ . Though AFAIK nobody is working on GCC > >> integration so far. > > > > I was looking for a short term solution. Not something that might possibly > > be available in 20 years :-) > > Changing GCC's output and getting IDEs to support it isn't exactly > short term either (and the suggested (E) additions look ugly IMHO).
The (E) and (W) tags would only be visible to the IDE. An IDE aware of that tag can easily strip it before displaying the message to the user. But, you are right and, beside, the solution proposed by David in his reply to this thread is much much better! IDEs don't have to change. By short term, I mean within one year or two. Linux distributions are very slow at adopting newer compiler major versions. I don't expect to see gcc 8 in production any time soon. > > Translations are unusable from within an IDE until gcc offers some > > solution to let the IDE detects errors and warnings irrespective of the > > selected language. > > > > Currently, every single translated gcc*.po file is affected (Spanish and > > Indonesian users would still see errors as "error" apparently translates > > to > > "error" in those languages). > > Or the translators decided not to translate those words, maybe for this > reason. That's possible, but then, they both forgot to leave the translation unchanged for "warning: ". That's the solution I'll apply with the French translation until the IDE compatibility option is available. Frederic
