Hello,
> > I also have a question about one of your change:
> >
> > --- a/sem_names.adb
> > +++ b/sem_names.adb
> > @@ -1980,8 +1980,8 @@ package body Sem_Names is
> > end;
> > if Res = Null_Iir then
> > Error_Msg_Sem
> > - ("prefix is neither a function name "
> > - & "nor can it be sliced or indexed", Name);
> > + ("No overloaded subprogram found matching "
> > + & Disp_Node (Prefix_Name), Name);
>
> > I wonder wether the message is an improvement or not, as the prefix
> > may
> > not be a function. But I suppose you'd like to display the prefix
> > to
> > make the message clearer ?
>
> The original error message appeared in the code twice, and seemed to
> make perfect sense in the other location (about 10 lines further on).
>
> I encountered it when the OSVVM demo was failing (an overloaded
> procedure wasn't found - in that case because of another bug) and it
> was
> really misleading in that circumstance (the prefix is a subprogram
> name,
> and the context is overload resolution).
> But if you can see circumstances where my replacement is misleading,
> then we need a new wording.
I agree with you. I have just lowercased the message, and replaced
'subprogram' by 'function'.
Tristan.
_______________________________________________
Ghdl-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
