From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-458889-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 6445 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2017 12:04:45 -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 127396 invoked by uid 89); 25 Jul 2017 12:04:39 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=14pm, 14PM
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 ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 12:04:38 +0000
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11])	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))	(No client certificate requested)	by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07E9E769EC;	Tue, 25 Jul 2017 12:04:37 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 07E9E769EC
Authentication-Results: ext-mx03.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
Authentication-Results: ext-mx03.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=polacek@redhat.com
Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-204-38.brq.redhat.com [10.40.204.38])	by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2398C8E832;	Tue, 25 Jul 2017 12:04:35 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 12:04:00 -0000
From: Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
To: Volker Reichelt <v.reichelt@netcologne.de>
Cc: gcc-patches List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,	David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] New C++ warning option '-Waccess-specifiers'
Message-ID: <20170725120425.GE3397@redhat.com>
References: <tkrat.2284ed76aa47e2e7@netcologne.de> <1500652589.7686.31.camel@redhat.com> <tkrat.1d8c51a3e57c04f9@netcologne.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <tkrat.1d8c51a3e57c04f9@netcologne.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23)
X-SW-Source: 2017-07/txt/msg01538.txt.bz2

On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 11:22:14PM +0200, Volker Reichelt wrote:
[...]

Not sure if the warning is too useful, but in any case...

> +  /* Emit warning.  */
> +  gcc_rich_location richloc (token->location);
> +  richloc.add_fixit_remove ();
> +  if (colon_token->type == CPP_COLON)
> +    richloc.add_fixit_remove (colon_token->location);
> +
> +  switch (message_id)
> +    {
> +    case 1:
> +      warning_at_rich_loc (&richloc, OPT_Waccess_specifiers_,
> +			   "redundant %qE access-specifier",
> +			   token->u.value);
> +      inform (next_token->location, "directly followed by another one here");
> +      break;
> +
> +    case 2:
> +      warning_at_rich_loc (&richloc, OPT_Waccess_specifiers_,
> +			   "duplicate %qE access-specifier",
> +			   token->u.value);
> +      inform (current_access_specifier_loc,
> +	      "same access-specifier was previously given here");
> +      break;

...you should only call inform if warning_at_rich_loc returned true.

	Marek