Il 14 marzo 2012 23:02, Józef Kucia joseph.ku...@gmail.com ha scritto:
@@ -679,11 +649,23 @@ void pp_writestring(const char *format, ...)
}
}
pp_iqs,pp_dqs,pp_sqs\\. add_string(ppy_text, ppy_leng);
-pp_iqs,pp_dqs,pp_sqs\n {
+pp_iqs\n {
newline(1);
add_string(ppy_text, ppy_leng);
ppy_warning(Newline in string constant encountered (started
line %d), string_start());
}
+pp_dqs\n {
+ newline(-1);
+ add_string(ppy_text, ppy_leng);
+ ppy_warning(Newline in double quoted string constant
encountered (started line %d), string_start());
+ if(end_double_quoted_string()) return tDQSTRING;
+ }
+pp_sqs\n {
+ newline(-1);
+ add_string(ppy_text, ppy_leng);
+ ppy_warning(Newline in single quoted string constant
encountered (started line %d), string_start());
+ if(end_single_quoted_string()) return tSQSTRING;
+ }
/*
* Identifier scanning
I'm not sure this is legit. If I'm reading the C spec correctly, a
character or string constant can be only terminated by ' or
respectively. Although it can't contain unescaped newline characters
either, so it looks like we are actually in the realm of undefined
behavior.
So, I guess this change will only have any effect on non-standard
complying sources, and in the specific case of asm-style comments, it
brings us the behavior we want. On the other hand, it also actually
turns an error (unexpected end of file) into a warning, which may be
troublesome in general.
I hope it doesn't break anything else...
(You can take this email as okay for me, but someone else may know better)
