On 05/12/2012 05:13 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
I find the name sentry confusing; I don't see how it applies.
Perhaps current instead?
Eh, from the point of view of a C++ library guy is even more confusing
but I tried to overcome that feeling ;) Anyway the below is the patch as
committed, using
On 05/10/2012 04:28 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Looks good.
Thanks Jason. The below is the idea fully implemented.
The call.c bits are exactly in the form I had in mind a couple of days ago.
The parser.c bits, the ones I actually preliminarily posted, are now a
bit different: I noticed that in
I find the name sentry confusing; I don't see how it applies. Perhaps
current instead?
Otherwise, the patch is OK.
Jason
On 10 May 2012 07:55, Miles Bader mi...@gnu.org wrote:
Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com writes:
in case my message ends up garbled, the carets do not point to
(column 13), two times point to b (column 20), which is obviously
wrong. In other terms, all the columns are 20, all wrong.
Looks good.
Jason
Hi,
I'm looking into making more progress on those locations, for another
class of cases. Consider:
struct T { };
T foo();
void bar(int a, int b)
{
if (foo() a b)
;
}
thus, in this case, we have a class type T, instead of void. The error
message is:
a.cc: In function ‘void
Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com writes:
in case my message ends up garbled, the carets do not point to
(column 13), two times point to b (column 20), which is obviously
wrong. In other terms, all the columns are 20, all wrong.
The new caret support does seem to have revealed a bunch of
