Hi,
On 04/26/2012 03:27 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
yes, it does. On the other hand, the program is going to exit soon...
-- Gaby
In any case, a bit of sloppiness on my part. Sorry about that. Now, all
in all I don't have a strong opinion, but we may want to apply something
like the below (bo
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 5:34 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> Hello all, and sorry for getting into this a bit late. I have a
> question concerning this patch:
>
>> +++ cp/call.c (working copy)
>
> [...]
>
>> +static const char *
>> +op_error_string (const char *err_msg, int ntypes, bool match)
>> +{
Hello all, and sorry for getting into this a bit late. I have a
question concerning this patch:
> +++ cp/call.c (working copy)
[...]
> +static const char *
> +op_error_string (const char *err_msg, int ntypes, bool match)
> +{
> + const char *msg;
> +
> + const char *msgt = concat (match ? G_(
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Marc Glisse
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>>
a hybrid approach; I would suggest something like this: (a) if caret
is in effect, then print
the caret
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
a hybrid approach; I would suggest something like this: (a) if caret
is in effect, then print
the caret pointing to the symbol in question; otherwise (b) print the
symbol and the type (as sug
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>
>> a hybrid approach; I would suggest something like this: (a) if caret
>> is in effect, then print
>> the caret pointing to the symbol in question; otherwise (b) print the
>> symbol and the type
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
a hybrid approach; I would suggest something like this: (a) if caret
is in effect, then print
the caret pointing to the symbol in question; otherwise (b) print the
symbol and the type (as suggested by Marc).
I may have forgotten the details, but loo
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> .. hi all, hi Gaby,
>
> a couple of days ago, Manuel suggested in the audit trail of the main "caret
> diagnostics" PR, that now that we actually have got a form of it, the kind
> of change I proposed to resolve PR 49152 may make much more se
.. hi all, hi Gaby,
a couple of days ago, Manuel suggested in the audit trail of the main
"caret diagnostics" PR, that now that we actually have got a form of it,
the kind of change I proposed to resolve PR 49152 may make much more
sense. In any case, my original patch still regtests fine toda
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> I haven't followed the whole diagnostic discussion, but what about printing
> both the reconstructed expression and the types?
Printing both isn't really the issue -- and we probably should. (And I thought
we did in some cases.)
What is at
On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 03/22/2012 05:25 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Paolo Carlini
wrote:
Hi,
this diagnostic issue is about not even trying to print expressions in
error
messages involving operators, and print operand types instead
Hi,
On 03/22/2012 05:25 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
this diagnostic issue is about not even trying to print expressions in error
messages involving operators, and print operand types instead. Just as an
example, for:
struct X { int x;
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this diagnostic issue is about not even trying to print expressions in error
> messages involving operators, and print operand types instead. Just as an
> example, for:
>
> struct X { int x; };
> void trigger (X x []) { x [01] = 0; }
Hi,
this diagnostic issue is about not even trying to print expressions in
error messages involving operators, and print operand types instead.
Just as an example, for:
struct X { int x; };
void trigger (X x []) { x [01] = 0; }
we currently print:
error: no match for ‘operator=’ in ‘*(x + 4
14 matches
Mail list logo
