[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [DotGNU]Supporting MS Error code syntax

From: Adam Treat
Subject: Re: [DotGNU]Supporting MS Error code syntax
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 17:00:02 -0500
User-agent: KMail/1.4.7

On Thursday 07 November 2002 04:27 pm, Rhys Weatherley wrote:
> Gopal V wrote:
> > do we need an error code thing ?.... It should be possible to do it
> > without disturbing anything except cscctest.
> >
> > CCErrorOnLine(42,".....") ? anyone ?
> Absolutely, positively, 100%, NOT!
> Error codes are an abomination, are impossible to keep consistent
> between compiler implementations, and are against GNU coding standards.
> The GNU standard is "filename:line[:column]: message".  Which is
> why gcc never uses codes, even though dozens of other C compilers do.
> n1k0 wants a way to disable certain warnings with a single number
> that works across all compilers.  We can add that by translating
> the "-fnowarn" code into our internal warning names while parsing
> the command-line options.

Howabout support for the csc style /nowarn option in csant?  Is this also a no 
go?  It really won't matter for Qt# since we are in the process of fixing our 
warnings ;-)  The warnings that n1k0 and I are concerned about come from the 
old qt# generator which is being replaced.  I ask this because csant is 
concerned with other compilers besides cscc...

> However, in my opinion, warnings should never be ignored.  They
> should be fixed.
> > 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 ...
> Where, pray tell, in the ECMA standard does it specify the error
> message format?  Or even the list of error codes that should be
> emitted for various conditions?
> > That brings up another question .... Is Eclipse support a good thing ?
> If they are willing to do the work, then it doesn't hurt us.
> Their license isn't GPL-compatible, but it is still technically
> a free software license.
> Cheers,
> Rhys.
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> address@hidden

reply via email to

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