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++/24985] caret diagnostics
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:52:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-24985-4-xSjTvWCRzW@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-24985-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24985

--- Comment #37 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-13 11:50:33 UTC ---
I think for Richard's example a nice compromise would be:

t.C: In function 'int main()':
t.C:5:6: error: no matching function for call to 'f(int)'
   f(1);
      ^
         note: candidates are:
t.C:1:6: note: void f()
t.C:1:6: note:   candidate expects 0 arguments, 1 provided
 void f();  void f(int,int);
      ^
t.C:1:17: note: void f(int, int)
t.C:1:17: note:   candidate expects 2 arguments, 1 provided
 void f();  void f(int,int);
                 ^

That includes all the relevant information but removes the duplication caused
by printing the same source code and caret after each pair of notes, and the
whitespace on the "candidates are" line instead of location info does help make
it look less cluttered.  GCC diagnostics do tend to look more densely packed
than some other compilers.  Caret diagnostics change that, but it's not
necessarily an improvement if they just space out every line with duplicated
snippets of source and carets.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-04-13 11:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-24985-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2012-03-21 12:06 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-04 15:28 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-04 15:32 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-04 15:50 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-04-04 18:49 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-04 18:53 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-04 19:20 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-05 12:14 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-05 17:02 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-05 22:06 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-05 22:10 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-07 12:55 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-09 16:07 ` dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-04-09 16:20 ` dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-04-11  9:28 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-11  9:53 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-12 21:45 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-12 21:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13  2:26 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-04-13  9:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 10:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 11:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 11:52 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2012-04-13 11:54 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 11:56 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 11:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 12:09 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 12:09 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 12:16 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 12:19 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 12:24 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 12:32 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 19:06 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 19:41 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-13 22:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-14 10:54 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-22 16:36 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-04  0:33 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-13 22:38 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2005-11-22  4:01 [Bug c++/24985] New: Line info in diagnostics is very unfriendly igodard at pacbell dot net
2008-07-22  9:50 ` [Bug c++/24985] caret diagnostics manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-07-02 23:50 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-07-02 23:55 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2009-07-03  0:26 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-07-03  0:38 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2009-07-03 11:04 ` dave at treblig dot org
2009-10-07 16:57 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-10-07 17:07 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-10-07 18:32 ` jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-10-07 21:26 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-10-15 17:34 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-10-15 18:51 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org

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-24985-4-xSjTvWCRzW@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).