Hi Daniel,
Some mostly boring comments:
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 09:25:10PM +0100, Daniel Marjamäki wrote:
> The first reason is the hard problem, but maybe we can ignore this now also:
>
> void f()
> {
> } // <- looking at the indentation, it seems preferable to warn about
> this
> }
I th
Thanks!
I will take care of the indentation and fix the comment.
> I think the indentation warnings should catch that?
I get this:
void f()
{
}
} // <- error: expected identifier or '(' before '}' token
I ran with -Wall -Wextra -pedantic and did not see a indentation
warning. Am I missing so
Here is a new patch with fixed comments and indentation
diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
index 972b629c092..294ff34fe55 100644
--- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
+++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
@@ -171,6 +171,8 @@ struct GTY(()) c_parser {
/* How many look-ahead tokens are available (0 - 4, or
