On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 09:24:18AM +0000, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 10/03/17 06:24, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 12:45:25PM -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > > PR translation/79923
> > > * auto-profile.c (get_combined_location): Convert leading
> > > character of diagnostics to lower case and remove trailing period.
> > > (read_profile): Likewise for various diagnostics.
> > > * config/arm/arm-builtins.c (arm_expand_builtin): Remove trailing
> > > period from various diagnostics.
> > > * config/arm/arm.c (arm_option_override): Likewise.
> > > * config/msp430/msp430.c (msp430_expand_delay_cycles): Likewise.
> > > (msp430_expand_delay_cycles): Likewise.
> > Mostly ok, but for
> >
> > > --- a/gcc/config/arm/arm-builtins.c
> > > +++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm-builtins.c
> > > @@ -2990,60 +2990,60 @@ arm_expand_builtin (tree exp,
> > > && (imm < 0 || imm > 32))
> > > {
> > > if (fcode == ARM_BUILTIN_WRORHI)
> > > - error ("the range of count should be in 0 to 32. please check
> > > the intrinsic _mm_rori_pi16 in code.");
> > > + error ("the range of count should be in 0 to 32. please check
> > > the intrinsic _mm_rori_pi16 in code");
> > I wonder if this shouldn't use a semicolon space in the middle
> > instead of dot space space (many times in the same file).
>
> Is there a convention in GCC to use semicolons?
> I'm okay with changing it to a semicolon (it's slightly better IMO) as long
> as it's consistent
> with the style GCC uses.
We have tons of messages like:
invalid --param name %qs; did you mean %qs?
Jakub
