From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14768 invoked by alias); 23 May 2007 15:57:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 14589 invoked by uid 48); 23 May 2007 15:57:20 -0000 Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 15:57:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070523155720.14588.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c/32023] No casts in lvalue error message In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "manu at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-05/txt/msg02048.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #10 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-23 16:57 ------- (In reply to comment #8) > The point I'm trying to express is that it's useful for user to have more > precise explanation. > Would you be happy with something like? t.c:9: error: lvalue required as increment operand t.c:9: note: a cast is not a lvalue Perhaps we could even pack it in a single line. The feasibility of this depends on whether we can get this information when we emit the diagnostic. I think if someone wants to pursue it, it shouldn't be difficult. So why not keep it open? Low-hanging fruit like this is ideal for newbies. -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu dot org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Keywords| |diagnostic Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-05-23 16:57:17 date| | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32023