From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id EE82D385842A; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 19:50:29 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org EE82D385842A
From: "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/53431] C++ preprocessor ignores #pragma GCC diagnostic
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2021 19:50:28 +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: 4.7.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic, documentation
X-Bugzilla-Severity: minor
X-Bugzilla-Who: manu at gcc dot gnu.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: <bug-53431-4-MeVkRcNRtk@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-53431-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-53431-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2021 19:50:30 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D53431

--- Comment #46 from Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez <manu at gcc dot gn=
u.org> ---
(In reply to Lewis Hyatt from comment #44)
> I hope this looks workable, happy to adjust the patch as needed.

If you don't get much attention to the patch, it may be worth pinging it. B=
ut
before that, I would also suggest submitting all the cleanups separately as
their own, easy-to-review patch. For example, the bits about
cp_token_is_module_directive.=