Le 24 sept. 2012 à 09:40, Akim Demaille a écrit :
> #1:
> foo.y: warning: 1 shift/reduce conflict [-Wconflicts-sr]
> foo.y: warning: 2 reduce/reduce conflicts [-Wconflicts-rr]
>
> bar.y: 1 shift/reduce conflict, expected 0
> bar.y: 2 reduce/reduce conflicts, expected 0
>
> #2:
> foo.y: warning: shift/reduce conflicts: 1 found [-Wconflicts-sr]
> foo.y: warning: reduce/reduce conflicts: 2 found [-Wconflicts-rr]
>
> bar.y: shift/reduce conflicts: 1 found, 2 expected
> bar.y: reduce/reduce conflicts: 2 found, 0 expected
BTW, I see that gcc is consistently prefixing its error
messages with "error", which I find much clearer and
really helping. I find both proposals above much clearer
when errors are flagged as such:
bar.y: error: 1 shift/reduce conflict, expected 0
bar.y: error: 2 reduce/reduce conflicts, expected 0
bar.y: error: shift/reduce conflicts: 1 found, 2 expected
bar.y: error: reduce/reduce conflicts: 2 found, 0 expected
so I plan to have {maint} move to using "error:". Would you
object to this?
