From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14445 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2019 17:22:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 13585 invoked by uid 89); 21 Jan 2019 17:22:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=HTo:D*oracle.com, tweak X-HELO: mail-qt1-f179.google.com Received: from mail-qt1-f179.google.com (HELO mail-qt1-f179.google.com) (209.85.160.179) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 21 Jan 2019 17:22:05 +0000 Received: by mail-qt1-f179.google.com with SMTP id u47so24353484qtj.6 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2019 09:22:05 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.1.115] (209-6-216-142.s141.c3-0.smr-cbr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcncustomer.com. [209.6.216.142]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q54sm66657806qtb.64.2019.01.21.09.22.02 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 21 Jan 2019 09:22:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [C++ Patch] Locations related grokdeclarator tweak To: Paolo Carlini , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" References: From: Jason Merrill Message-ID: <2e6fe4b4-3d4f-b5b8-9722-ca02bf8cf992@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 17:22:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-01/txt/msg01226.txt.bz2 On 1/18/19 6:13 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > a tweak to typespec_loc, where the existing conditional turns out to be > just a special case of the full min_location that we want in order to do > the right thing for testcases like diagnostic/trailing1.C. Tested > x86_64-linux. This is OK, but I don't think we want to keep messing with diagnostic locations now that we're in stage 4. This isn't a regression fix, is it? Jason