From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bootstrap/3653: -fmessage-length=72 with g++ makes no sense
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:46:00 -0000
Message-id: <20010713204605.8372.qmail@sourceware.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00393.html
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR bootstrap/3653; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de>
To: Gabriel Dos Reis <Gabriel.Dos-Reis@cmla.ens-cachan.fr>
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bootstrap/3653: -fmessage-length=72 with g++ makes no sense
Date: 13 Jul 2001 22:39:24 +0200

 Gabriel Dos Reis <Gabriel.Dos-Reis@cmla.ens-cachan.fr> writes:
 
 > | Besides the misinterpretation by tools, the wrapped output is more
 > | difficulty to read by humans also:
 > | 
 > | - the human brain can surveying grouped data faster than ungrouped
 > |   one. The current wrapping destroys grouping.
 > 
 > Actually, it is the unreadability of the previous formatting which
 > prompted the implementation of the functionality in discussion.
 
 What is more readable:
 
 g++3     test.cc   -o test
 test.cc: In function `int main()':
 test.cc:15: no matching function for call to `foo<std::string, 
    foo<std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> >, 
    std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> >, 
    std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> > >, 
    foo<std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> >, 
    std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> >, 
    std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> > > 
    >::bar(const char[3])'
 test.cc:8: candidates are: void foo<XXX, YYY, ZZZ>::bar() [with XXX = 
    std::string, YYY = foo<std::basic_iostream<std::string, 
    std::char_traits<std::string> >, std::basic_iostream<std::string, 
    std::char_traits<std::string> >, std::basic_iostream<std::string, 
    std::char_traits<std::string> > >, ZZZ = 
    foo<std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> >, 
    std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> >, 
    std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> > >]
 test.cc:9:                 void foo<XXX, YYY, ZZZ>::bar(int) [with XXX = 
    std::string, YYY = foo<std::basic_iostream<std::string, 
    std::char_traits<std::string> >, std::basic_iostream<std::string, 
    std::char_traits<std::string> >, std::basic_iostream<std::string, 
    std::char_traits<std::string> > >, ZZZ = 
    foo<std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> >, 
    std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> >, 
    std::basic_iostream<std::string, std::char_traits<std::string> > >]
 
 
 or
 
 
 g++3 -fmessage-length=0     test.cc   -o test
 test.cc: In function `int main()':
 test.cc:15: no matching function for call to `foo<std::string, [-->
 test.cc:8: candidates are: void foo<XXX, YYY, ZZZ>::bar() [with[-->
 test.cc:9:                 void foo<XXX, YYY, ZZZ>::bar(int) [w[-->
 
 ([--> means horizontal scrolling in XEmacs; on my screen some columns
 later (at #175)).
 
 
 > | I suggest a value of `0'. ;) ... at least if it is not a tty...
 > 
 > That is the users's responsability.
 
 Why not make it a user responsability to adjust the value if he want
 line-wrapping?
 
 > | [... -fmessage-length=0 option ...]
 > | Older gcc do not know this option and will fail to compile.
 > 
 > There are bunch of options there which are recognized by older GCC.
 
 Either these options have not changed behavior or there was a technical
 reason to change it.
 
 
 
 
 Enrico