On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Kaelyn Uhrain <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yeah, I was having trouble coming up with wording that would work both >> when the declaration being diagnosed doesn't have a "const" but one of the >> matched decls does, and when the matched decl doesn't but the decl being >> diagnosed does. In particular I was trying to avoid having those two cases >> being two separate Diag statements under two branches of an if statement. > > > What about (based on Eli's example): "member declaration does not match > because it %select{is|is not}N const qualified" > > It seems good to have the message explicitly indicate in which direction > the error was made, and we can use select to avoid over complex emission > code... > Yup, already using a %select in the diagnostic to be able to explicitly indicate the direction of the mismatch. My comment wasn't directed at Eli's example but more a general comment that I trying to come up with a message for which I could use %select. If folks are fine with the wording Eli suggested then I'll use that and submit the patch. ;)
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
