[llvm-dev] [RFC] Preferred error/note style across non-clang tools, e.g. tablegen (original) (raw)
Chris Lattner via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Jul 21 12:30:12 PDT 2020
- Previous message: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Preferred error/note style across non-clang tools, e.g. tablegen
- Next message: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Preferred error/note style across non-clang tools, e.g. tablegen
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Jul 21, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Jonathan Roelofs via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
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?
I think it makes a lot of sense to add this to TableGen. It is a widely used tool and the QoI for its error messages could use a lot of improvement!
-Chris
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200721/0e4f1466/attachment.html>
- Previous message: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Preferred error/note style across non-clang tools, e.g. tablegen
- Next message: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Preferred error/note style across non-clang tools, e.g. tablegen
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]