[cfe-commits] [patch] Mention "put ambiguous fixits on notes" in internals manual

Richard Smith richard at metafoo.co.uk
Mon Jun 4 11:41:32 PDT 2012

On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>> several threads on this list discussed that fixits on errors and warnings
>> have to be very likely correct. "did you mean" fixits on the other hand
>> should go on a separate note instead. The attached patch adds this to the
>> internals manual.
> Looks reasonable (I think you can take my opinion as approval in this case -
> but I guess you sent it out for review looking for other feedback too,
> perhaps). If it interests you, it's probably also worth highlighting the
> "recover as written" requirement which isn't entirely clear/explicit in
> those docs (and the implication that has on fixits on warnings: that they
> cannot change semantics - they have to be the "suppression" fix at most
> (which means there are very few cases where fixits on warnings are valid
> (since if you're confident the warning is good then the chances are that the
> suppression is not the right fix)))

+1. I think that the statement in the patch that "[...] warnings
should only have fix-its that very likely match the user's intent" is
likely to mislead people if we don't also document the "recover as
written" requirement.

More information about the cfe-commits mailing list