On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 10:00 -0400, Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches wrote: > On 5/13/21 9:07 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > > On 5/13/21 7:38 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > > > On 5/13/21 1:28 PM, Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > > Ping. > > > > > > > > On 4/28/21 9:32 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: > > > > > -Wdeprecated-copy was depending only on the state of the > > > > > warning > > > > > at the > > > > > point where we call the function, making it hard to use > > > > > #pragma > > > > > diagnostic > > > > > to suppress the warning for a particular implicitly declared > > > > > function. > > > > > > > > > > But checking whether the warning is enabled at the location > > > > > of the > > > > > implicit > > > > > declaration turned out to be a bit complicated; > > > > > option_enabled only > > > > > tests > > > > > whether it was enabled at the start of compilation, the > > > > > actual test > > > > > only > > > > > existed in the middle of diagnostic_report_diagnostic. So > > > > > this patch > > > > > factors it out and adds a new warning_enabled function to > > > > > diagnostic.h. > > > > > > There is a bit of overlap in this patch with my work here: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/563862.html > > > but nothing that concerns me, for whatever it's worth. > > > > > > In my ongoing work to extend TREE_NO_WARNING to more than one bit > > > I've been thinking of introducing a function (actually a pair of > > > them) similar to warning_enabled(). The overloads will take > > > a tree and gimple* rather than a location so that they can > > > consider > > > the inlining context. This is only useful in the middle end so > > > front ends can still use location_t. > > > > > > Just one suggestion: since warning_at() takes location_t and int > > > for the option in that order, I would recommend doing the same > > > for warning_enabled(), just to reduce the risk of confusion. > > > (It would be nice if location_t could be something other than > > > an arithmetic type). > > > > Sure. I'd probably rename it to warning_enabled_at, in that case, > > and > > drop the default argument. > > Looks like I never sent the (slightly) updated patch.
The diagnostic changes look good to me, thanks. Dave
