From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1372 invoked by alias); 4 Oct 2011 19:59:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 1355 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Oct 2011 19:59:52 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 19:59:28 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p94Jx3OI012745 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 4 Oct 2011 15:59:03 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p94Jx1SF030557; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 15:59:01 -0400 Received: from [0.0.0.0] (ovpn-113-54.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.54]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p94JwvqO023846; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 15:58:57 -0400 Message-ID: <4E8B6580.3090404@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 20:03:00 -0000 From: Jason Merrill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110906 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dodji Seketeli CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, tromey@redhat.com, gdr@integrable-solutions.net, joseph@codesourcery.com, burnus@net-b.de, charlet@act-europe.fr, bonzini@gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] Emit macro expansion related diagnostics References: <1291979498-1604-1-git-send-email-dodji@redhat.com> <4E6E73F8.4030603@redhat.com> <4E74AA75.8090106@redhat.com> <4E778A26.1000707@redhat.com> <4E77ACA1.80205@redhat.com> <4E789C5B.20509@redhat.com> <4E793BF4.4010103@redhat.com> <4E7B497F.8060301@redhat.com> <4E80E47C.305@redhat.com> <4E83B6D5.5030907@redhat.com> <4E84C9FA.30604@redhat.com> <4E85E004.2030706@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00262.txt.bz2 On 10/03/2011 04:08 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote: > Jason Merrill writes: >>> -finish_declspecs (struct c_declspecs *specs) >>> +finish_declspecs (struct c_declspecs *specs, >>> + location_t where) >> >> I'm not sure the beginning of the declspecs is a better place for >> these diagnostics than the beginning of the declarator. > > To fix the particular example of PR 7263 (and the example > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/cpp/syshdr3.c that I added to that particular > patch) where the declspec is what is defined in the system header, and > the declaration (declspec + declarator) gets assembled in the source, we > want pedwarn[1] (really diagnostic_report_diagnostic) to detect that the > declspec is spelled in a system header. So we want pedwarn to be passed > the location of a declspec. So then this change would make _Complex c; OK, but not static _Complex c; because the first declspec is not from a macro, right? > I believe you noted this at some point and > agreed with me that ideally each declspec should come with its location > but that's work for another occasion. If I'm right about the above example, I think I'd rather hold off this declspecs change until that time. Jason