From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-398828-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 54784 invoked by alias); 25 May 2015 19:56:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 54774 invoked by uid 89); 25 May 2015 19:56:58 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 25 May 2015 19:56:57 +0000
Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26])	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t4PJusaB018014	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL);	Mon, 25 May 2015 15:56:54 -0400
Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-204-52.brq.redhat.com [10.40.204.52])	by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t4PJuo0v029134	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);	Mon, 25 May 2015 15:56:53 -0400
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 20:17:00 -0000
From: Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
To: Manuel =?iso-8859-1?B?TPNwZXotSWLh8WV6?= <lopezibanez@gmail.com>
Cc: Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,        "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>,        Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH c/c++] use explicit locations for some warnings in c-pragma.c
Message-ID: <20150525195650.GY27320@redhat.com>
References: <CAESRpQAss9wY48rxjsVC_VHn5c2bC+ZKf4m6fvL-ZNVFLkmKEA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAESRpQAss9wY48rxjsVC_VHn5c2bC+ZKf4m6fvL-ZNVFLkmKEA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg02266.txt.bz2

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 06:06:01PM +0200, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>    if (token != CPP_NAME)
> -    GCC_BAD ("missing [error|warning|ignored] after %<#pragma GCC diagnostic%>");
> +    {
> +      warning_at (loc, OPT_Wpragmas,
> +		  "missing [error|warning|ignored|push|pop] after %<#pragma GCC diagnostic%>");

Line too long.

> -    GCC_BAD ("expected [error|warning|ignored|push|pop] after %<#pragma GCC diagnostic%>");
> +    {
> +      warning_at (loc, OPT_Wpragmas,
> +		  "expected [error|warning|ignored|push|pop] after %<#pragma GCC diagnostic%>");

Likewise.

Perhaps we should introduce GCC_BAD_LOC with a location_t argument and use it
here.

	Marek