[Bug c++/53152] New: In "no match for operatorXX" error message, mention the types of the arguments

[Bug c++/53152] New: In "no match for operatorXX" error message, mention the types of the arguments

[zeratul976 at hotmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53152

             Bug #: 53152
           Summary: In "no match for operatorXX" error message, mention
                    the types of the arguments
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.7.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: zeratul976@hotmail.com


Consider the following code:

struct T {};

struct S
{
    T foo();
};

int main()
{
    S a, b;
    a.foo() == b.foo();
}


The error message is:

error: no match for 'operator==' in 'a.S::foo() == b.S::foo()'


Notice the error doesn't mention 'T' anywhere. It would be nice if it did,
because in the general case the arguments passed to the operator could be
arbitrarily complex expressions, and working out their type manually can be
tedious.

[Bug c++/53152] In "no match for operatorXX" error message gives the wrong column info

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53152

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
           Keywords|                            |diagnostic
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2012-04-28
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
            Summary|In "no match for            |In "no match for
                   |operatorXX" error message,  |operatorXX" error message
                   |mention the types of the    |gives the wrong column info
                   |arguments                   |
           Severity|normal                      |enhancement

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-28 07:25:33 UTC ---
The trunk already does:
t.cc: In function ‘int main()’:
t.cc:11:21: error: no match for ‘operator==’ (operand types are ‘T’ and ‘T’)
    a.foo() == b.foo();
                     ^
Tough we don't point at == but the call to b.foo() which seems wrong.

So confirmed about the wrong column info.

[Bug c++/53152] In "no match for operatorXX" error message gives the wrong column info

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53152

--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-28 19:54:51 UTC ---
printing the types was basically PR 49152

[Bug c++/53152] In "no match for operatorXX" error message gives the wrong column info

[paolo.carlini at oracle dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53152

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |lopezibanez at gmail dot
                   |                            |com

--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-05-04 10:57:11 UTC ---
How could we in principle fix this? Pass down from cp_parser_binary_expression
the location of the operator token, through build_x_binary_op -> build_new_op
-> build_new_op_1 -> op_error? Boring but straightforward. Or something else
entirely? I'm just guessing, really.

[Bug c++/53152] In "no match for operatorXX" error message gives the wrong column info

[manu at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53152

Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|lopezibanez at gmail dot    |manu at gcc dot gnu.org
                   |com                         |

--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-04 11:27:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> How could we in principle fix this? Pass down from cp_parser_binary_expression
> the location of the operator token, through build_x_binary_op -> build_new_op
> -> build_new_op_1 -> op_error? Boring but straightforward. Or something else
> entirely? I'm just guessing, really.

Since we don't pass down the expression itself, I don't see any other way than
passing down the location. In general almost all build_* function should be
build_*(location_t loc,...). Thanks for doing this, it will improve the caret a
lot (and perhaps the debugging experience).

[Bug c++/53152] In "no match for operatorXX" error message gives the wrong column info

[paolo.carlini at oracle dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53152

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot       |paolo.carlini at oracle dot
                   |gnu.org                     |com

--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-05-04 12:30:37 UTC ---
Ok, let's do this. I'm attaching a proof-of-concept patch.

[Bug c++/53152] In "no match for operatorXX" error message gives the wrong column info

[paolo.carlini at oracle dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53152

--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-05-04 12:31:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 27306
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27306
POC

[Bug c++/53152] In "no match for operatorXX" error message gives the wrong column info

[paolo at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53152

--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org <paolo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-06 15:06:35 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun May  6 15:06:31 2012
New Revision: 187211

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187211
Log:
2012-05-06  Paolo Carlini  <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>

    PR c++/53152
    * call.c (op_error, build_new_op_1, build_new_op): Add location_t
    parameter.
    (build_conditional_expr_1): Adjust.
    * typeck.c (build_x_indirect_ref, build_x_binary_op,
    build_x_unary_op): Add location_t parameter.
    (rationalize_conditional_expr, build_x_array_ref,
    build_x_compound_expr, cp_build_modify_expr, build_x_modify_expr):
    Adjust.
    * typeck2.c (build_x_arrow): Add location_t parameter.
    * semantics.c (finish_unary_op_expr): Likewise.
    (finish_increment_expr, handle_omp_for_class_iterator): Adjust.
    * decl2.c (grok_array_decl): Add location_t parameter.
    * parser.c (cp_parser_postfix_open_square_expression,
    cp_parser_postfix_dot_deref_expression, cp_parser_unary_expression,
    cp_parser_binary_expression, cp_parser_builtin_offsetof,
    do_range_for_auto_deduction, cp_convert_range_for,
    cp_parser_template_argument, cp_parser_omp_for_cond): Pass the
    location, adjust.
    * pt.c (tsubst_copy_and_build): Adjust.
    * tree.c (maybe_dummy_object): Likewise.
    * cp-tree.h: Update declarations.

Modified:
    trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/cp/call.c
    trunk/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h
    trunk/gcc/cp/decl2.c
    trunk/gcc/cp/parser.c
    trunk/gcc/cp/pt.c
    trunk/gcc/cp/semantics.c
    trunk/gcc/cp/tree.c
    trunk/gcc/cp/typeck.c
    trunk/gcc/cp/typeck2.c

[Bug c++/53152] In "no match for operatorXX" error message gives the wrong column info

[paolo.carlini at oracle dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53152

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.8.0

--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-05-06 15:09:02 UTC ---
Done.