On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 1:17 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 12/12/21 3:13 AM, Andrea Monaco via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> > Hello.
> >
> >
> > I propose to make that message more verbose. It sure would have helped
> > me once. You don't always have a Web search available :)
>
> Warnings turned into errors have the [-Werror=...] tag at the end
> so I'm not sure I see when reiterating -Werror at the end of output
> would be helpful. Can you explain the circumstances when it would
> have helped you?
>
> For what it's worth, a change here that I think might be more useful
> is printing the number of diagnostics of each kind (e.g., 2 warnings
> and 5 errors found).
>
I swear we already had a bug open for this suggestion, but after much
searching I can't seem to find it anymore, so if anyone has any ideas
of what keywords I forgot to try, feel free to send them...
> > Andrea Monaco
> >
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/diagnostic.c b/gcc/diagnostic.c
> > index 4ded1760705..8b67662390e 100644
> > --- a/gcc/diagnostic.c
> > +++ b/gcc/diagnostic.c
> > @@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ default_diagnostic_final_cb (diagnostic_context
> > *context)
> > /* -Werror was given. */
> > if (context->warning_as_error_requested)
> > pp_verbatim (context->printer,
> > - _("%s: all warnings being treated as errors"),
> > + _("%s: all warnings being treated as errors (-Werror;
> > disable with -Wno-error)"),
>
> If this change should move forward, -Werror needs to be quoted
> (e.g., passed as an argument to %qs or surrounded in a pair of
> %< and %> directives). The "disable with -Wno-error" part
> is superfluous and would not be entirely accurate for warnings
> promoted to errors by #pragma GCC diagnostic (those cannot be
> demoted back to warnings by -Wno-error).
>
> Martin
>
> > progname);
> > /* At least one -Werror= was given. */
> > else
> >
>
