From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30133 invoked by alias); 23 May 2003 10:32:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30035 invoked from network); 23 May 2003 10:32:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ms-dienst.rz.rwth-aachen.de) (134.130.3.130) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 May 2003 10:32:17 -0000 Received: from ms-2 (ms-2 [134.130.3.131]) by ms-dienst.rz.rwth-aachen.de (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.12 (built Feb 13 2003)) with ESMTP id <0HFC00JWQ3QYZM@ms-dienst.rz.rwth-aachen.de> for gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Fri, 23 May 2003 11:59:23 +0200 (MEST) Received: from relay.RWTH-Aachen.DE ([134.130.3.1]) by ms-2 (MailMonitor for SMTP v1.2.2 ) ; Fri, 23 May 2003 11:49:24 +0200 (MEST) Received: from numa-vi (numa-vi.igpm.RWTH-Aachen.DE [134.130.161.247]) by relay.rwth-aachen.de (8.12.9/8.12.7-1) with ESMTP id h4N9nNNZ018474; Fri, 23 May 2003 11:49:23 +0200 (MEST) Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 10:36:00 -0000 From: Volker Reichelt Subject: Re: Suggestion for new keywords in bugzilla To: neroden@twcny.rr.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Reply-to: Volker Reichelt Message-id: <200305230949.h4N9nNNZ018474@relay.rwth-aachen.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: INLINE X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg02072.txt.bz2 Nathanael Nerode wrote: > >> * diagnostic (for error messages/warnings that are misleading or broken > >> and superfluous/missing warnings) > > I actually thought that there should be two keywords for this: > > missing-diagnostic (There should be a warning, but there isn't.) > misleading-diagnostic (There's a warning which shouldn't be there, or > should be replaced by a different warning.) I don't think that we really need two keywords, because the volume is low: We now have thirty-something PRs with the stamp "[diagnostic]" in the summary line. They all fit on a single screen. And even if the number doubled, the number would still be small compared to "ice-on-(in)valid-code" for example. And we still have the summary line where we can give information like "misleading". Btw, thanks for adding the keyword "error-recovery"! Regards, Volker