From: Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org>
To: "Manuel López-Ibáñez" <lopezibanez@gmail.com>
Cc: Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>,
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
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 20:38:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKdteOYY1O50YLv7URgXX1Yiht=VPJvgT6Z8p2k6bUrDfb6pCw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAESRpQA=V4JmGTzOmJxgjCe+_mUMXdhMMVBnuGiDeW8LxOYi5A@mail.gmail.com>
On 25 May 2015 at 22:16, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25 May 2015 at 21:56, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Perhaps we should introduce GCC_BAD_LOC with a location_t argument and use it
>> here.
>
> Why would we want to obfuscate code like that? I would propose to
> actually remove GCC_BAD completely.
>
Hi
It looks like this patch has finally been committed on 2015-09-18
(r227923), right?
I can see the newly introduced test (gcc.dg/pragma-diag-5.c) failing:
/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pragma-diag-5.c:2:83:
warning: missing [error|warning|ignored|push|pop] after '#pragma GCC
diagnostic' [-Wpragmas]
/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pragma-diag-5.c:4:24:
warning: expected [error|warning|ignored|push|pop] after '#pragma GCC
diagnostic' [-Wpragmas]
/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pragma-diag-5.c:6:32:
warning: unknown option after '#pragma GCC diagnostic' kind
[-Wpragmas]
XFAIL: gcc.dg/pragma-diag-5.c missing (test for warnings, line 2)
PASS: gcc.dg/pragma-diag-5.c (test for warnings, line 4)
PASS: gcc.dg/pragma-diag-5.c (test for warnings, line 6)
FAIL: gcc.dg/pragma-diag-5.c (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pragma-diag-5.c:2:83:
warning: missing [error|warning|ignored|push|pop] after '#pragma GCC
diagnostic' [-Wpragmas]
I'm not sure why, since the 1st warning is xfail.
Christophe.
> Manuel.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-20 20:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-25 17:47 Manuel López-Ibáñez
2015-05-25 19:48 ` Jason Merrill
2015-05-25 20:17 ` Marek Polacek
2015-05-25 20:55 ` Manuel López-Ibáñez
2015-09-20 20:38 ` Christophe Lyon [this message]
2015-09-20 22:35 ` Manuel López-Ibáñez
2015-09-21 0:24 ` Christophe Lyon
2015-09-21 0:29 ` Manuel López-Ibáñez
2015-09-21 0:33 ` Christophe Lyon
2015-09-21 1:46 ` Manuel López-Ibáñez
2015-09-21 5:50 ` Christophe Lyon
2015-09-21 12:32 ` Manuel López-Ibáñez
2015-11-04 9:46 ` Mike Stump
2015-11-04 21:02 ` Manuel López-Ibáñez
2015-11-06 21:16 ` Mike Stump
2015-11-06 21:18 ` Mike Stump
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAKdteOYY1O50YLv7URgXX1Yiht=VPJvgT6Z8p2k6bUrDfb6pCw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=christophe.lyon@linaro.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=lopezibanez@gmail.com \
--cc=polacek@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).