On 11/20/18 4:24 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/20/2018 03:10 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/15/18 5:54 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/15/2018 03:12 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hi.
I've done a quick grep of gcc/po/gcc.pot and I see quite a lot of missing
quotations
of option names (~400). Is it something we should fix? How important is that?
That's quite a few... I've been fixing these as I notice them,
usually as part of related changes. The most onerous part of
the cleanup is adjusting tests, especially under the target-
specific ones. It's (obviously) not critical but I think it
would be nice to make the quoting consistent throughout over
time (if not in one go) and then put in place a -Wformat
checker to detect the missing quoting as new diagnostics are
introduced. Do you think it might be scriptable?
Hi.
Are you talking about a proper GCC warning that will be triggered once a warning
message is missing quotations?
I can definitely cook a patch in next stage1 and the testsuite fall out should
be easy to come with.
Yes, issuing a -Wformat warning for __gcc_diag__ functions is what
I'm thinking of. A checker that would look for substrings within
the format string that match the "-[Wfm][a-z][a-z_1-9]*" patterns
(or anything else that matches an option) and point them out if
they're not enclosed in a pair of %< %> (or suggest to use %qs).
Martin
Sounds good to me. Well, I can imagine doing that for GCC 9 release.
When will you find spare cycles for the warning? In can prepare
the warning/error messages patch.
Thanks,
Martin
