From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECDE0384D1AA for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 16:59:14 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org ECDE0384D1AA Received: from mail-qv1-f71.google.com (mail-qv1-f71.google.com [209.85.219.71]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-321-QSK0Yp4yPpOJhiBVzoibAw-1; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:59:13 -0400 X-MC-Unique: QSK0Yp4yPpOJhiBVzoibAw-1 Received: by mail-qv1-f71.google.com with SMTP id b18-20020a0ccd12000000b004703d1b04e8so15916670qvm.13 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 09:59:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=WPtsGHiwcqo/ReDeHVs01HhZlXfBMjTFxa6e1gWXfXg=; b=0S0nOfl5wR0FcWyM5YrbkZQwdUjuEqTHM4PmSOienLG4Mp7tacGDC/KxQFry4Fde4X xXIULSfGwAiYLix1QPsXVoER8iYFLbQHp5vHyalNYMk4UZ/7zRKkP/guDb1TjIq1VvMt s7nv+MZ4iJHkKHX6pJNa06bAkEXHgkZ2cy0yIa1xng7Nn/ULUnPRw5DyZwSX2SCRgOWP 69nPNTANLiy2KtSQscPWWTbNMeEN9typUq2aRfn6W9J0MWKvCYGc09GWu62jN5IiKKpN 3AzWljDf838CsSEccCBBMDyZmefsGapp/JUManTIgs00Dku1wWIk/KwWAU2KjTxvuOrl +pzw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora8SBYRkoykzpszqYotpaMPyDiPZPZeuQ+w6qg/WQqyBhMnr/iG8 AaZnAjwV31XbIyhnAID67MPc7LPPeAimPtyvYMtt9KXXD3dd5KrrF/HoCpqIPOUxLcadZNxA8pd jEyv2cY7i1FtAz3z3KA== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5312:0:b0:470:4c4b:9263 with SMTP id y18-20020ad45312000000b004704c4b9263mr8602431qvr.61.1656521953109; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 09:59:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1uqmQHKwNBAfpJvK0mLBkOBhkZC9ku0d5cwPuLS1jdCRyb7f3gVDVj3Occxi0S1ub+9uyk7xQ== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5312:0:b0:470:4c4b:9263 with SMTP id y18-20020ad45312000000b004704c4b9263mr8602413qvr.61.1656521952789; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 09:59:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (130-44-159-43.s15913.c3-0.arl-cbr1.sbo-arl.ma.cable.rcncustomer.com. [130.44.159.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bm9-20020a05620a198900b006a73ad95d40sm13314406qkb.55.2022.06.29.09.59.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 29 Jun 2022 09:59:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:59:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0 Subject: Re: Ping^2: [PATCH v2] diagnostics: Honor #pragma GCC diagnostic in the preprocessor [PR53431] To: Lewis Hyatt , gcc-patches List References: From: Jason Merrill In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, KAM_SHORT, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 16:59:16 -0000 On 6/23/22 13:03, Lewis Hyatt via Gcc-patches wrote: > Hello- > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595556.html > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431#c49 > > Would a C++ maintainer have some time to take a look at this patch > please? I feel like the PR is still worth resolving. If this doesn't > seem like a good way, I am happy to try another -- would really > appreciate any feedback. Thanks! Thanks for your persistence, I'll take a look now. Incidentally, when pinging it's often useful to ping someone from MAINTAINERS directly, as well as the list. I think your last ping got eaten by some trouble Red Hat email was having at the time. The cp_token_is_module_directive cleanup is OK. > + bool skip_this_pragma; This member seems to be equivalent to in_pragma && !should_output_pragmas () Maybe it could be a member function instead of a data member? More soon. Jason