Re: [PATCH 2/2] Improve reporting of section conflict errors

["Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>]

On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Andi Kleen wrote:

> +/* Print section flags F into BUF */

End comment with ".  */".

> +	{ "code", SECTION_CODE, 0 },
[...]

> +  if (f)
> +    sprintf (buf, "rest %x", f);

Are these strings meant to be English language or literal programming 
language text?  If English, there should be appropriate arrangements for 
translation.

> +	  char buf[1024]; 
> +

I agree a variable size buffer would be better - but the minimum is 
runtime checks to avoid overflow in the case of long translations etc. (so 
don't use sprintf etc. without knowing there is enough space left at 
runtime).

It would be nice to eliminate direct use of sprintf from GCC - even if you 
do know there is enough space, using snprintf is better discipline.  (And 
asprintf/vasprintf - in favour of xasprintf/xvasprintf - if someone could 
just approve <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01448.html and 
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01449.html>.)

> +	  inform (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl), 
> +		  "New section declaration differs in: %s", 
> +		  section_flags_string (buf, flags));

Diagnostics start with lowercase letters.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com