From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-397957-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 77459 invoked by alias); 15 May 2015 11:48:14 -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 77417 invoked by uid 89); 15 May 2015 11:48:09 -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_40,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-wi0-f177.google.com
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (HELO mail-wi0-f177.google.com) (209.85.212.177) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 15 May 2015 11:48:08 +0000
Received: by wibt6 with SMTP id t6so54793401wib.0        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Fri, 15 May 2015 04:48:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.194.192.166 with SMTP id hh6mr12179051wjc.127.1431690485144; Fri, 15 May 2015 04:48:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.103.70 with HTTP; Fri, 15 May 2015 04:47:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <86mw16utdv.fsf@redhat.com>
References: <CAESRpQA7jAeZWuAen36bX2kHoag3RgngUwFTAa+Q+tfHB+oFhg@mail.gmail.com> <86h9rogn3z.fsf@redhat.com> <CAESRpQDdrOwNZd74JO5u-7nVOH5_n1h+KsMwvtkhaPTQ6d9UxQ@mail.gmail.com> <86mw16utdv.fsf@redhat.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?TWFudWVsIEzDs3Blei1JYsOhw7Fleg==?= <lopezibanez@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 12:23:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAESRpQDshYAF6tJ1uoHBL=4ZRR028+yGcWcZY_XJY_o0XzUJ+w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH diagnostics/fortran] Handle two locations for the same diagnostic. Convert all gfc_warning_1 and gfc_notify_std_1 calls
To: Dodji Seketeli <dodji@redhat.com>
Cc: Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg01395.txt.bz2

On 15 May 2015 at 10:39, Dodji Seketeli <dodji@redhat.com> wrote:
> Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez <lopezibanez@gmail.com> writes:
>> -/* Expand the location of this diagnostic. Use this function for consis=
tency. */
>> +/* Return the location associated to this diagnostic. WHICH specifies
>
> Here, I think only the 'W' (in WHICH) should be uppercase.

I'm following the convention that parameter names are uppercase in the
description of functions. I can also say "Parameter WHICH specifies"
to be more explicit.


>>  /* The type of a text to be formatted according a format specification
>>     along with a list of things.  */
>>  struct text_info
>>  {
>> +public:
>
> As this is a struct, the 'public' here is not necessary, as the members
> are public by default.

I have a very poor memory for such details ;), since we are using
'private:' already, does it really hurt to be explicit and use
'public:' here?

>>    const char *format_spec;
>>    va_list *args_ptr;
>>    int err_no;  /* for %m */
>> -  location_t *locus;
>>    void **x_data;
>> +
>> +  inline location_t & set_location (unsigned int index_of_location)
>
> I think it's less surprising to have the this function take two
> parameters:  The index_of_location and the new new location.

OK.

> OK to commit with the changes above.

Thanks. If you insist on the two first changes, I'll do them, I just
want to confirm those.

Cheers,

Manuel.