On Mon, 2017-07-03 at 23:01 +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: > Does the changed location fix bug 7356?
The patch as-written doesn't affect that bug, since the patch only affects sites that use c_parser_require and cp_parser_require with certain token types, and the diagnostic in PR 7356 is emitted by the C FE here: 2174 /* This can appear in many cases looking nothing like a 2175 function definition, so we don't give a more specific 2176 error suggesting there was one. */ 2177 c_parser_error (parser, "expected %<=%>, %<,%>, %<;%>, %<asm%> " 2178 "or %<__attribute__%>"); (the C++ FE handles it, emitting: pr7356.c:1:1: error: ‘a’ does not name a type a//sample ^ ) c_parser_error currently uses the location of the next token, and concats as description of the next token. I tried hacking up c_parser_error to unconditionally attempt to use the location immediately after the previous token. This "fixes" PR 7356, giving: pr7356.c:1:2: error: expected ‘=’, ‘,’, ‘;’, ‘asm’ or ‘__attribute__’ before ‘typedef’ a//sample ^ This error message might be better to be worded in terms of the syntactic thing that came before, which would yield: pr7356.c:1:2: error: expected ‘=’, ‘,’, ‘;’, ‘asm’ or ‘__attribute__’ after declaration a//sample ^ or somesuch. Doing so would presumably require adding an extra param to c_parser_error, e.g. an enum describing the syntactic elements that go before. Does this sound worth pursuing as a followup? Thanks Dave
