public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
Cc: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>,
	Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>,
	 gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] c++: fix source printing for "required from here" message
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 07:52:59 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <edb0c6d0-7936-1387-26c7-59203df27c8a@idea> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a899c6796eec17186918f9ffb116b1ed642caa4.camel@redhat.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7749 bytes --]

On Thu, 25 Apr 2024, David Malcolm wrote:

> On Wed, 2024-04-24 at 17:05 -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Apr 2024, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > 
> > > On 4/24/24 13:22, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > > > Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, full bootstrap+regtest in
> > > > progress,
> > > > does this look OK if successful?
> > > > 
> > > > -- >8 --
> > > > 
> > > > It seems the diagnostic machinery's source line printing respects
> > > > the pretty printer prefix, but this is undesirable for the call
> > > > to
> > > > diagnostic_show_locus in print_instantiation_partial_context_line
> > > > added in r14-4388-g1c45319b66edc9 since the prefix may have been
> > > > set when issuing an earlier, unrelated diagnostic and we just
> > > > want
> > > > to print an unprefixed source line.
> > > > 
> > > > This patch naively fixes this by clearing the prefix before
> > > > calling
> > > > diagnostic_show_locus.
> > > > 
> > > > Before this patch, for error60a.C below we'd print
> > > > 
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C: In function ‘void
> > > > usage()’:
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:24:3: error:
> > > > ‘unrelated_error’ was
> > > > not declared in this scope
> > > >     24 |   unrelated_error; // { dg-error "not declared" }
> > > >        |   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C: In instantiation of
> > > > ‘void
> > > > test(Foo) [with Foo = int]’:
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:25:13:   required from
> > > > here
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:24:3: error:    25 |  
> > > > test<int>
> > > > (42); // { dg-message " required from here" }
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:24:3: error:       |
> > > > ~~~~~~~~~~^~~~
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:19:24: error: invalid
> > > > conversion
> > > > from ‘int’ to ‘int*’ [-fpermissive]
> > > >     19 |   my_pointer<Foo> ptr (val); // { dg-error "invalid
> > > > conversion from
> > > > 'int' to 'int\\*'" }
> > > >        |                        ^~~
> > > >        |                        |
> > > >        |                        int
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:9:20: note:  
> > > > initializing argument
> > > > 1 of ‘my_pointer<Foo>::my_pointer(Foo*) [with Foo = int]’
> > > >      9 |   my_pointer (Foo *ptr) // { dg-message " initializing
> > > > argument 1"
> > > > }
> > > >        |               ~~~~~^~~
> > > > 
> > > > and afterward we print
> > > > 
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C: In function ‘void
> > > > usage()’:
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:24:3: error:
> > > > ‘unrelated_error’ was
> > > > not declared in this scope
> > > >     24 |   unrelated_error; // { dg-error "not declared" }
> > > >        |   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C: In instantiation of
> > > > ‘void
> > > > test(Foo) [with Foo = int]’:
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:25:13:   required from
> > > > here
> > > >     25 |   test<int> (42); // { dg-message " required from here"
> > > > }
> > > >        |   ~~~~~~~~~~^~~~
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:19:24: error: invalid
> > > > conversion
> > > > from ‘int’ to ‘int*’ [-fpermissive]
> > > >     19 |   my_pointer<Foo> ptr (val); // { dg-error "invalid
> > > > conversion from
> > > > 'int' to 'int\\*'" }
> > > >        |                        ^~~
> > > >        |                        |
> > > >        |                        int
> > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C:9:20: note:  
> > > > initializing argument
> > > > 1 of ‘my_pointer<Foo>::my_pointer(Foo*) [with Foo = int]’
> > > >      9 |   my_pointer (Foo *ptr) // { dg-message " initializing
> > > > argument 1"
> > > > }
> > > >        |               ~~~~~^~~
> > > > 
> > > > gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
> > > > 
> > > >         * error.cc (print_instantiation_partial_context_line):
> > > > Clear
> > > >         context->printer->prefix around the call to
> > > > diagnostic_show_locus.
> > > > 
> > > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> > > > 
> > > >         * g++.dg/concepts/diagnostic2.C: Expect source line
> > > > printed
> > > >         for the required from here message.
> > > >         * g++.dg/template/error60a.C: New test.
> > > > ---
> > > >   gcc/cp/error.cc                             |  2 +
> > > >   gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/concepts/diagnostic2.C |  6 ++-
> > > >   gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C    | 46
> > > > +++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >   3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >   create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/error60a.C
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/gcc/cp/error.cc b/gcc/cp/error.cc
> > > > index 7074845154e..a7067d4d2ed 100644
> > > > --- a/gcc/cp/error.cc
> > > > +++ b/gcc/cp/error.cc
> > > > @@ -3793,7 +3793,9 @@ print_instantiation_partial_context_line
> > > > (diagnostic_context *context,
> > > >                    : _("required from here\n"));
> > > >       }
> > > >     gcc_rich_location rich_loc (loc);
> > > > +  char *saved_prefix = pp_take_prefix (context->printer);
> > > >     diagnostic_show_locus (context, &rich_loc, DK_NOTE);
> > > > +  context->printer->prefix = saved_prefix;
> > > 
> > > I would follow the pattern of c_diagnostic_finalizer here, i.e.
> > > using
> > > pp_set_prefix for the restore.
> > 
> > FWIW that's what I originally went with, but I don't really
> > understand
> > the other things pp_set_prefix does besides setting the prefix and
> > then I noticed cp_print_error_function restores ->prefix directly so
> > I ended up doing that instead.
> 
> I have a slight preference for using pp_set_prefix for the restore, but
> the patch as written is also OK; thanks.

Thanks a lot, pushed as r15-4-g7d5479a2ecf630 which uses pp_set_prefix
for the restore as suggested.

> 
> I confess that I don't have a strong sense of how the prefix code is
> meant to work.
> 
> It seems to be for use with this combination of options:
>   -fmessage-length=NON_ZERO -fdiagnostics-show-location=every-line
> which triggers line-wrapping, adding the prefix at each line when line
> wrapping occurs.  This seems to have existed at least as far back as 
> 856b62442f6fc5e4302ae9ee1ebce8a19bbd8681
> re this "C++ err msgs" thread from 2000:
> 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2000-May/004650.html
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2000-May/004664.html
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2000-May/031143.html
> 
> which made the prefixing optional on continuation lines.
> 
> I suspect that if anyone was using that combination of options, we've
> probably broken it at some point with quoting of source code,
> underlining, fix-it hints, etc etc
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Though I think the pp_set_prefix to NULL in c_diagnostic_finalizer
> > > is
> > > redundant and should have been removed in r9-2240-g653fee1961981f
> > > when the
> > > previous line changed from _set_ to _take_.  If it isn't redundant,
> > > then it
> > > should be, i.e. pp_take_prefix should call it instead of directly
> > > setting
> > > NULL.
> > > 
> > > Some _take_ callers do set(NULL) and others don't; they should
> > > definitely be
> > > consistent one way or the other.
> > > 
> > > David, what do you think?
> > > 
> > > Jason
> > > 
> 
> 

      reply	other threads:[~2024-04-26 11:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-24 20:22 Patrick Palka
2024-04-24 20:54 ` Jason Merrill
2024-04-24 21:05   ` Patrick Palka
2024-04-25 18:48     ` David Malcolm
2024-04-26 11:52       ` Patrick Palka [this message]

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=edb0c6d0-7936-1387-26c7-59203df27c8a@idea \
    --to=ppalka@redhat.com \
    --cc=dmalcolm@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jason@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).