[cfe-commits] [Patch] Print differences for function pointers.

[Richard Smith]

On Mon, November 21, 2011 22:44, Richard Trieu wrote:
> Ping.

I've added a few more comments on the code review site.

Thanks,
Richard

> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Matthieu Monrocq <
> matthieu.monrocq at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Le 17 novembre 2011 01:14, Richard Trieu <rtrieu at google.com> a écrit :
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Matthieu Monrocq <
>>
>>> matthieu.monrocq at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Le 15 novembre 2011 21:23, Richard Trieu <rtrieu at google.com> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> New feature that will print additional information when non-matching
>>>>
>>>>> function pointers are used.  This will help users more easily
>>>>> distinguish why the function pointers do not match.  The points of
>>>>> difference that will be noted are:
>>>>>
>>>>> Different number of parameters
>>>>> Different parameter type
>>>>> Different return type
>>>>> Different function qualifiers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For instance, code like this:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> double foo(int x) {return 0;}; double (*bar)(int, int) = &foo;
>>>>>
>>>>> Will get this error message:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> function-mismatch.cc:2:10: error: cannot initialize a variable of
>>>>> type 'double (*)(int, int)' with an rvalue of type 'double (*)(int)'
>>>>> because of different number of parameters (expected 2 but has 1) double
>>>>> (*bar)(int, int) = &foo;
>>>>> ^                ~~~~
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Patch is attached and also available at
>>>>> http://codereview.appspot.com/5369119/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nice!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do you plan on adding something for a difference of class (for pointer
>>>> to member functions) ? Or perhaps that it already exists...
>>>>
>>>> -- Matthieu
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Added a bit to the diagnostic message to say if they are from different
>>>>
>>> classes, as well as changes in response to comments Richard Smith made on
>>>  http://codereview.appspot.com/5369119/
>>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>> -- Matthieu
>>
>>
>