2014-02-28 22:52 GMT+01:00 Fabien Chêne <fabien.ch...@gmail.com>: >>> Incidentally, while moving the diagnostic concerning the uninitialized >>> field from an error to an inform, I realized that the syntactic sugar >>> %q#D is no longer honored an is treated as %qD, is it expected ? >> >> >> No, how do you mean? > > I must be tired, false alarm, sorry.
I guess my mistake comes from the fact that %q#D is not present in the c++98 diagnostic. Shall we homogeneise that as well ? In favor of %q#D ? -- Fabien
