On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 09:38:18PM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote: > On Fri, 18 Oct 2019, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 05:49:24PM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote: > > > sparse complains loudly when string literals associated with > > > preprocessor directives are split into multiple, separately quoted > > > strings across different lines: > > > > ... > > > > > #ifndef __riscv_cmodel_medany > > > -#error "setup_vm() is called from head.S before relocate so it should " > > > - "not use absolute addressing." > > > +#error "setup_vm() is called from head.S before relocate so it should > > > not use absolute addressing." > > > #endif > > > > Using a blacslash should do the trick : > > #error "blablablablablablablablablablablabla" \ > > "and blablabla again" > > Or if need I cn fix Sparse if needed and desiable. > > Thanks for the kind offer! > > The backslashless syntax is pretty horrible to my eyes. As far as I can > tell from a brief glance, the instance fixed by this patch was the only > instance of its kind in the kernel. The existing kernel precedents appear > to be to simply use a single long line. Example: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h#n3 > > So, from a kernel point of view, we should just fix this specific > instance. It doesn't seem worth changing sparse for such a rare case. > > On the other hand, gcc seems to support the non-backslashed syntax. So if > the intention is for sparse to follow the gcc practice, and to be used > beyond the kernel, maybe it's worth aligning sparse to gcc? Only if > you're bored, I suppose...
I'll first see what is acceptable for the point of view of the standard (and maybe some justifications from GCC). -- Luc
