Re: patches to detect GCC diagnostics

Am 16.05.2019 um 22:24 schrieb Martin Sebor: > On 5/16/19 8:58 AM, Roland Illig wrote: >> -  error ("#pragma GCC target string... is badly formed"); >> +  error ("%<#pragma GCC target%> string is badly formed"); >> -  error (

patches to detect GCC diagnostics

Hi Martin, I'm impressed how much work you have put into the patches for detecting nonoptimal diagnostics. It takes a long time to read through the patches, but it's worth it, knowing that it took much longer for you to prepare the patch, and that I won't have to submit i18n bug reports in the

[PATCH] improve linter for diagnostics

The linter in contrib/ checks all messages that the GCC user may see whether they conform roughly to the GCC Guidelines for Diagnostics. * contrib/check-internal-format-escaping.py: improve output of the linter by providing short rationales for the warnings; detect space

[PATCH] Add myself to MAINTAINERS

Already committed, as per https://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/svnwrite.html. 2019-05-04 Roland Illig * MAINTAINERS (Write After Approval): Add myself. Index: MAINTAINERS === --- MAINTAINERS (Revision 270868) +++ MAINTAINERS

Replacement for diagnostics linter

There's a linter in contrib/check-internal-format-escaping.py that checks whether the base file for translations (such as French or German) conform to some basic style rules. This mostly affects the diagnostics emitted by GCC. As the German translation I have added several checks to the linter

Re: Diagnostics that should not be translated

Am 15.03.2017 um 03:43 schrieb Martin Sebor: > Would using the existing internal_error{,no_backtrace}, and > sorry work for this? (I.e., not translating those.) If my > count is right there are nearly 500 calls to these three in > GCC sources so I'm not sure that would put enough of a dent > in

Diagnostics that should not be translated

Hi, the gcc.pot file currently contains more than 12000 messages to be translated, which is a very high number. Many of these messages are diagnostics, and they can be categorized as follows: * errors in user programs, reported via error () * additional info for internal errors, reported via

Re: [PATCH 1/7] Add missing punctuation to message (PR driver/79875)

Am 10.03.2017 um 05:12 schrieb Martin Sebor: > I have just an observation/question here for future consideration. > If this sort of diagnostic is common (I count 23 instances of it) > or if it is expected to become common, would it make sense to add > a directive for it to the pretty printer to

diagnostics: %<%s%> vs. %qs

Hi, in the diagnostics the %qs specifier is used in most of the cases. But there are some cases left where the more complicated %<%s%> is used. Is there a good reason to prefer the complicated spelling? Same for %<%T%> and %qT, and similar letters. Regards, Roland

terminology: zero character vs. null character

Hi, I am currently translating GCC into German. During that, I noticed that in some places the term "zero character" means '\0'. The official term though is "null character", as per the C standard. Since it is confusing to have two different terms for the same concept, the term "zero character"