From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 117688 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2017 20:38:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 117671 invoked by uid 89); 7 Mar 2017 20:38:12 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mout.gmx.net Received: from mout.gmx.net (HELO mout.gmx.net) (212.227.17.22) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 20:38:11 +0000 Received: from [192.168.178.23] ([185.23.225.96]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MXVr0-1coBpb1sJC-00WUGP for ; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 21:38:05 +0100 To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org From: Roland Illig Subject: diagnostics: %<%s%> vs. %qs Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Message-ID: <29d5d377-3260-53d6-6dc5-80a014a1ac49@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 20:38:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:+SB10bRpZS8=:nd3etsw2q2/wJiEXjYKRi5 lgGyR78d1gsQcED4kwGmVsTAGKkyOMQYCoX8WTy1znaSt8Q2Dz3LYnqLivOfskwHHzSEfMmkW gsrWPavs05NkrX0Lqsls/WINn7UQMt0LKfcVP5FJSG9tul18DhNqPgUGFDSVx7WgENFpSsqwJ YjohwAm8sZUJBJHzy0AVSFxAQvA8g+Wz6W66njP2w7luN6gHvjlqW9UkZvigegaC2P2ax6DsQ nI2SJs7o4Jz9EI77eNscVW06FlB5fS3HBqGcAhYDLInHtzogJD4kXsGT+EQ8THpo03v11M1O7 Yqm0qta2sNpEsppsmPKihMBe9a8Szq0TOJmJTsAtkY+E007VEhVVv7COt2cw3wPa6EfBOotHS ElDnzrTVq8cXmPEAXj8pAT8mgz49UnJyQT4VzV1jcF/JaGUDVuqQm9qD3iL5UQlvEcsqnqT0i A3FIdtepIQvZT04Ri0L17VDaaMGJeFxJaNViyANLvaci0+1mVmQI6onWLPBuaHZZ/Lxm9CPcU MoJ4N2DwadajUdxzzuJGsJKHf1ZYFohSBF4FpP57YvuuuRlPXTF4h3H0Q9u8VaC6Eewcb0ZTb xPqmr7TQZhTev3syqsWHlRtzgxDRTFIeeU1qRWSlIbltqB0rupR48CdKTPz3+R4Pw6IpBgM2C ZiEA8e081OD8tswAGMbIa/gdrIEIRMFx6RsD4hCjTn8eyNAkJlvg2iiEsGJLA222XcxboRuHu ZIHTU4kppYDfaN/crI9iJRj6PP5CRG4jCTJ/9VhJH6gw4Aud6wombpKDZSEXuZQcAk4tfdcQ9 taLFLlB3V9Faz+7dYBVF+UrqIxsKBO5xxyp2Y7St6U96fZXnZKAwoBmVXGX+1DPR3+sJCScHN yrJl4DP8UYwoAnwZ/BHbhfLKmhmf1/lOw6Yn0nObwNlVZWUgl7+n06Lu0qBL+K5TmX3NWZgwl AZVCJ11kkMl5PEYoKMijtEklC7sMqxgIC9XK7W7GAjZAUhg4WnjsYTiwes6kRd/SySTo1yByV 4SQXyNAEJn9k5tYncDkSYipuZZcUA3I+WeROYsSF4UHeqePiaK3sea/XrwtJFt3i+w== X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-03/txt/msg00016.txt.bz2 Hi, in the diagnostics the %qs specifier is used in most of the cases. But there are some cases left where the more complicated %<%s%> is used. Is there a good reason to prefer the complicated spelling? Same for %<%T%> and %qT, and similar letters. Regards, Roland