On Tue, 15 Oct 2019, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > No. I'd expect the code generating the IR from GCC diagnostics should
> > arrange for the message to be translated first (while in the case of
> > __builtin_warning in user code, it would not be translated), and the code
> > subsequently using
Joseph Myers writes:
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2019, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
>> On 10/14/19 4:03 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> > How does this interact with translation?
>> >
>> > My expectation would be that in user code, the message is taken literally
>> > as-is; it is not looked up in the GCC message catalo
On Mon, 14 Oct 2019, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 10/14/19 4:03 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > How does this interact with translation?
> >
> > My expectation would be that in user code, the message is taken literally
> > as-is; it is not looked up in the GCC message catalog even if it is
> > identical
On 10/14/19 4:03 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
How does this interact with translation?
My expectation would be that in user code, the message is taken literally
as-is; it is not looked up in the GCC message catalog even if it is
identical to some GCC diagnostic. However, when used internally for GCC
How does this interact with translation?
My expectation would be that in user code, the message is taken literally
as-is; it is not looked up in the GCC message catalog even if it is
identical to some GCC diagnostic. However, when used internally for GCC
diagnostics, they should be translated,
