From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28831 invoked by alias); 13 Apr 2012 09:08:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 28822 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Apr 2012 09:08:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-ob0-f175.google.com) (209.85.214.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:08:09 +0000 Received: by obbuo13 with SMTP id uo13so4424640obb.20 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 02:08:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.169.41 with SMTP id ab9mr1204803obc.4.1334308088800; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 02:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.51.234 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 02:08:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20120413014027.GA18116@synopsys.com> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:08:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Updated GCC vs Clang diagnostics From: Jonathan Wakely To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Manuel_L=F3pez=2DIb=E1=F1ez?= Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis , Joe Buck , gcc Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00571.txt.bz2 On 13 April 2012 09:27, Manuel L=F3pez-Ib=E1=F1ez wrote: > > I think my words above should be read in their own context, where > their true meaning can be fully appreciated. Then, one may be able to > appreciate that: > > * Saying "I don't think X is important, so I am against it and you > should spend your free time in Y." and "Of course, you are free to > spend your time in whatever you want." is not logically consistent. > The only choices offered are Y or nothing. Joe didn't say *you* should spend your time on Y, he suggested something he thought was more important, and he said *he'd* turn off colour output which is not the same as saying it shouldn't be added. > * A real choice is offered by the paragraph above which changes the > statement to "I don't think X is important, and you should use spend > your free time on Y, but I am not against Y, so patches welcome." That's how I read Joe's mail. There's no reason for this discussion to get heated, we're all working towards the same goal. > * In the paragraph above, you also seem to have missed the irony that > the example I chose as "not important" are small diagnostic issues, on > which I (among very very few) have spent significant effort in the > recent years. I was hoping that this irony would help the reader to > understand that the example is not meant to be taken seriously, and it > is only there to demonstrate the previous logical inconsistency. I'm afraid I missed that irony too, despite being well aware of all the great work you've done on those sort of diagnostics. I was about to reply saying the mixing up "." and "->" is not obscure at all. Irony and subtly don't work by email.