On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 00:54:33 +0100
Hans-Peter Nilsson <h...@axis.com> wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 00:23:36 +0100
> > From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot....@gmail.com>
>
> > On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:02:31 +0100
> > Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <h...@axis.com>
> > > > Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 16:36:46 +0100
> > >
> > > > ... this is what I intend to commit later
> > > > today, just keeping the added comment as brief as
> > > > reasonable:
> > >
> > > Except I see the hook for errno magic took care of
> > > gcc.dg/analyzer/flex-without-call-summaries.c so I'll add
> > > that to the list of handled "FAIL"s in the commit log. Yay.
> >
> > But in the end it means we'll have to keep _[_]+errno{,_location} 'til
> > we bump requirements or 10, 20 years or the end of the universe,
> > doesn't it.
> > Way fancy.
>
> Not sure I see your point? The (other) identifiers are already there.
I'm certainly not opposed to this partiular identifier, no.
>
> (And you do realize that this is in the analyzer part of gcc, right?)
And yes, i'm well aware this is "just" the analyzer -- which is unfair
to state like that and does not mean to imply any inferiority --
particular in this spot.
Just let's ditch any specialcased identifier which was superseded
reliably ASAP?
thanks,
