[llvm-dev] [RFC] Preferred error/note style across non-clang tools, e.g. tablegen (original) (raw)
Jonathan Roelofs via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Jul 21 11:50:21 PDT 2020
- Previous message: [llvm-dev] [Job Ad] Join SiFive's MLIR for Silicon Team!
- Next message: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Preferred error/note style across non-clang tools, e.g. tablegen
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
A question of preference came up in https://reviews.llvm.org/D83588 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D83588> as to whether we ought to prefer emitting TableGen error messages with all of the information in a single diagnostic, or whether it makes sense to split things in an error+note style as seen in many clang diagnostics. TableGen doesn’t use a DiagnosticsEngine, so the concept of a fatal note following an error is a bit new/foreign there, but perhaps something that makes sense adding.
Is there any precedence here for other internal llvm tooling (outside of clang)? What’s the general consensus here?
Jon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200721/5e18e019/attachment.html>
- Previous message: [llvm-dev] [Job Ad] Join SiFive's MLIR for Silicon Team!
- Next message: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Preferred error/note style across non-clang tools, e.g. tablegen
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]