When I fixed PR57630, I failed to adjust the expected message in
gcc.dg/c90-fordecl-1.c test (sorry for that); so we regressed. Fixed
thusly, will commit as obvious.
Tested with make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=dg.exp=c90-fordecl-1.c
2013-06-18 Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com>
* gcc.dg/c90-fordecl-1.c: Adjust expected message.
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/c90-fordecl-1.c.mp3 2013-06-18 12:10:11.233225073
+0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/c90-fordecl-1.c 2013-06-18 12:11:27.332603234
+0200
@@ -9,6 +9,6 @@ foo (void)
int j = 0;
for (int i = 1; i <= 10; i++) /* { dg-bogus "warning" "warning in place of
error" } */
j += i;
- /* { dg-error "'for' loop initial declarations are only allowed in C99 mode"
"declaration in for loop" { target *-*-* } 10 } */
- /* { dg-message "note: use option -std=c99 or -std=gnu99 to compile your
code" "note" { target *-*-* } 10 }} */
+ /* { dg-error "'for' loop initial declarations are only allowed in C99 or
C11 mode" "declaration in for loop" { target *-*-* } 10 } */
+ /* { dg-message "note: use option -std=c99, -std=gnu99, -std=c11 or
-std=gnu11 to compile your code" "note" { target *-*-* } 10 }} */
}
Marek
