public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/104095] g++ diagnosis may use non-standard terminology: "constant" instead of "literal", "integer" instead of "integral"
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 14:11:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-104095-4-65yRir5o9e@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-104095-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104095

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |diagnostic

--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Pavel M from comment #0)
> С++ standard does not have "integer constant". С++ standard has "integral
> constant".

The standard has "integral constant expression". There are only a handful of
uses of "integral constant" and they're arguably mistakes that should be
changed.

> С++ standard does not have "hexadecimal floating constant". С++ standard has
> "hexadecimal floating literal".

The standard has "hexadecimal-floating-point-literal".

> С++ standard does not have "floating constant". С++ standard has "floating
> literal".

The standard has "floating-point-literal".

Both of those cases are grammar productions. GCC's diagnostics do not
necessarily refer to that formal term, because they're user-facing, and not
part of a BNF grammar.

Not all programmers are familiar with the terminology of the standard. If a
simpler or more colloquial term exists, it might be more user friendly to use
that. In all cases above, the term used by GCC is shorter than the formal term
from the standard.

That said, I do think "floating constant" should be improved.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-18 14:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-18 13:51 [Bug c++/104095] New: " pavel.morozkin at gmail dot com
2022-01-18 14:11 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2023-07-24  2:16 ` [Bug c++/104095] " de34 at live dot cn

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-104095-4-65yRir5o9e@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).