https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95714
Bug ID: 95714
Summary: Poor locations for errors in calls to __atomic
built-ins
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
int main()
{
char c;
int i;
__atomic_load(&c, &i, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
}
The C compiler says:
ab.cc: In function 'main':
ab.cc:5:3: error: size mismatch in argument 2 of '__atomic_load'
5 | __atomic_load(&c, &i, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
and the C++ compiler says:
ab.cc: In function 'int main()':
ab.cc:5:41: error: size mismatch in argument 2 of '__atomic_load'
5 | __atomic_load(&c, &i, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
| ^
Both are poor. Instead of saying "argument 2" and highlighting the function
name or the end of the argument list, we should highlight the relevant
argument:
ab.cc: In function 'main':
ab.cc:5:3: error: size mismatch in argument 2 of '__atomic_load'
5 | __atomic_load(&c, &i, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
| ^~
Even better would be:
ab.cc: In function 'main':
ab.cc:5:3: error: size mismatch in argument 2 of '__atomic_load'
5 | __atomic_load(&c, &i, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
| ^~ ^~
| | |
| | int*
| char*
