https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83236
Bug ID: 83236
Summary: "Did you mean" suggestions maybe shouldn't offer
implementation-private names
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: zackw at panix dot com
Target Milestone: ---
On Linux/glibc,
$ cat > test.c <<EOF
#include <sys/stat.h>
ino_t inode;
EOF
$ gcc -std=c89 -fsyntax-only test.c
test.c:2:1: error: unknown type name ‘ino_t’; did you mean ‘__ino_t’?
ino_t inode;
^~~~~
__ino_t
$ gcc --version
gcc (Debian 7.2.0-16) 7.2.0
__ino_t is an implementation detail of glibc's headers, and application
programmers shouldn't be encouraged to use it.
To first order, I don't think any implementation-namespace names (/^_[_A-Z]/)
should be offered as suggestions. To second order, they could be suggested
when the unknown symbol is itself in the implementation namespace, or when the
suggestion is a _documented_ impl-namespace symbol like __DATE__ or _IOFBF or
_Bool.
