Farid Zaripov wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 5:48 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: testsuite process helpers
>
[...]
> Okay, let's go with it. How about
>
> rw_enable(int(*)(int, int, const char*, const char*, ...),
> bool = true);
>
> so that we can simply call it like so:
>
> rw_enable(rw_error, false); // disable errors
> rw_enable(rw_note); // enable notes
>
> and we don't have to move diag_t into driver.h.
The patch is attached.
Excellent! Just one question/suggestion regarding naming...
[...]
Index: src/opt_trace.cpp
===================================================================
--- src/opt_trace.cpp (revision 465232)
+++ src/opt_trace.cpp (working copy)
@@ -33,7 +33,10 @@
// masked diagnostics (those that shouldn't be issued)
int _rw_diag_mask = 1 << diag_trace;
+// masked diagnostics (those that should be ignored)
+int _rw_ignore_mask = 0;
Would _rw_diag_ignore be a better name? The variable is a bitmap
of diagnostics to ignore (the one above is a bitman of those that
are masked).
Thanks
Martin
