[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DotGNU]Supporting MS Error code syntax

From: Gopal V
Subject: [DotGNU]Supporting MS Error code syntax
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 22:41:33 +0530
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

<n1ko>  CSXXXX
<t3rmin4t0r>    I suppose they mean "MS Compliant"
<n1ko>  Yeah, I'm not sure having those are a stipulated 'requirement'
<n1ko>  However, I've noticed them missing at times
<t3rmin4t0r>    is the "code" for an error a good thing ?
<n1ko>  Yes, in that I can enable or disable the same warning condition on 
                all C# compilers with the same error code
<t3rmin4t0r>    hmm....
<n1ko>  I definitely think more people will notice that missing as pnet gets 
                more users
<t3rmin4t0r>    but that is a *huge* patch ?
Nov 07 20:16:42 *       t3rmin4t0r thinks CCErrorOnline can be patched to fix 
that ?
<n1ko>  I didn't say it'd be easy ;)
<n1ko>  Mail the list, see what other people think if you're conflicted :)

So here it is ...

do we need an error code thing ?.... It should be possible to do it without
disturbing anything except cscctest.

CCErrorOnLine(42,".....") ? anyone ?

The use of 42 instead of "CS0042" will allow us to block warnings for code.
"-fnowarn=CSXXXX" ... (sscanf(s,"CS%04D",&num));

IMHO this is a lot of WORK .... But would help people who just want to block
a few warnings (like override warnings in QT#).

Also how about the -fdoc=filename thing ? ... (viz make cscc call csdoc , 
like it calls cscc-cs).

I had a mail from the Eclipse Csharp people saying "your error messages are
not in ECMA format" ... Currently I think a hundred line patch to their
compiler invoke code can fix them up for CSCC support ...

That brings up another question .... Is Eclipse support a good thing ?

The difference between insanity and genius is measured by success

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]