From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 0F1A93858017; Sat, 2 Sep 2023 00:29:52 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 0F1A93858017 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1693614592; bh=9c+V+2+SC4v24fbjmd1R14/lhR7fgKmTu1MSjiYZbEk=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=cRQkwKviPAl2cypWRLHtlyucPep7I+Be/lNDR3mHxFWcQOFlxPIb0iEXJgtTMtxaF KWKt8cHgICxSjcZxo6LO2Or+wHOazChmylpC0uveYGktZcaGt/DGF/iZKXZKwHOYVa HDQfabqM7F7HPjov7E4lKGigMMFmVg5mq/K8WAuY= From: "alx at kernel dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/111269] location for non-constant expressions inside static assert could be better Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2023 00:29:51 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.1.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: alx at kernel dot org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111269 --- Comment #3 from Alejandro Colomar --- On 2023-09-01 18:57, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111269 > > Andrew Pinski changed: > > What |Removed |Added > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugz= ill > | |a/show_bug.cgi?id=3D55678 > Did you accidentally point to a different bug? I don't think that one is related at all. _Static_assert escapes tick marks just to make me mad=