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 B2BB3385843B; Fri, 24 Dec 2021 21:29:23 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B2BB3385843B
From: "lhyatt 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: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 21:29:22 +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: lhyatt 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-cWCJJAJVZ7@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: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 21:29:23 -0000

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

--- Comment #47 from Lewis Hyatt <lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez from comment #46)
> If you don't get much attention to the patch, it may be worth pinging it.
> But before that, I would also suggest submitting all the cleanups separat=
ely
> as their own, easy-to-review patch. For example, the bits about
> cp_token_is_module_directive.

Thank you for the note, I have resubmitted it to gcc-patches in two parts:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-December/587357.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-December/587358.html

The cp_token_is_module_directive that you highlighted clearly should be in =
its
own patch, yes. I looked through the rest though and wasn't able to identify
anything else that seemed to make sense when split out on its own, so that
ended up being the only thing I factored out.=