Re: [PATCH 0/6] v2 of libdiagnostics

Hi David - and thanks for posting an outline for libdiagnostics at https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/libdiagnostics Currently this shows both libdiagnosts and libdiagnostics-sarif-dump integrated into GCC. Is this the plan or would those be available as a top-level project (the program as an example for

Re: [PATCH 0/6] v2 of libdiagnostics

Thank you for your efforts. Having the wiki page to track this definitely is useful! I'll have a look at the "real patch" later, likely next week. But for patch 4+5 which look quite clean: can we get an early improvement and inclusion into GCC for those? They only adjust internals and should be

Re: [PATCH 2/2] libdiagnostics: work-in-progress implementation

Am 07.11.2023 um 15:59 schrieb David Malcolm: On Tue, 2023-11-07 at 08:54 +0100, Simon Sobisch wrote: Thank you for our work and providing this patch. GCC related questions: Is it planned to change GCC diagnostics to use libdiagnostic itself? No. GCC uses C++ internally, and the

Re: [PATCH 2/2] libdiagnostics: work-in-progress implementation

Thank you for our work and providing this patch. GCC related questions: Is it planned to change GCC diagnostics to use libdiagnostic itself? Is it planned to "directly" add features or would the result for GCC be identical (apart from build changes)? So far it looks like it wouldn't be possi

Re: [PATCH] binutils: experimental use of libdiagnostics in gas

Thank you very much for this proof-of-concept use! Inspecting it raises the following questions to me, both for a possible binutils implementation and for the library use in general: * How should the application set the relevant context (often lines are shown before/after)? * Should it be po

Re: libiberty: Would it be reasonable to add support for GnuCOBOL function name demangling?

Am 27.05.22 um 20:31 schrieb Eric Gallager: On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 3:17 AM Simon Sobisch via Gcc-patches wrote: [...] the first question is: is it reasonable to add support for GnuCOBOL? * How would the demangler know it is to be called? Just "best match" (GnuCOBOL modules always

libiberty: Would it be reasonable to add support for GnuCOBOL function name demangling?

;we" or I start? Thank you for taking the time to read and possibly answer, Simon Sobisch Maintainer GnuCOBOL OpenPGP_0x13E96B53C005604E.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature