Re: enums and switch vs function calls

Path	csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: enums and switch vs function calls
Date	Sun, 04 May 2025 06:55:53 -0700
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	34
Message-ID	<86ldrc7a52.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink)
References	<vsr0ml$1to9m$1@dont-email.me> <enum-20250405122329@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <1ybIP.1259194$2zn8.458292@fx15.iad> <86y0wdfvc0.fsf@linuxsc.com> <FtwIP.1525960$eNx6.1342019@fx14.iad> <87bjslhzfd.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <E8POP.99689$oJg.83920@fx17.iad> <87zfg3hp05.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date	Sun, 04 May 2025 15:55:54 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info	dont-email.me; posting-host="f2e2a4892b4200c8deca4768c4473856"; logging-data="2179137"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18ydI8UkYzlI115QmCqkdvDqCN2faHHblY="
User-Agent	Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock	sha1:CniGgW0EwjfXeHQgJ68H+7at4KM= sha1:dgvvlW4PM3/NwzANoY/tB4B6WsY=
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.c:393135

Show key headers only | View raw

Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> writes:

> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>
>> Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> writes:
>>
>>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>>
>>>> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>
> ...
>
>>>>> That's true, but it can be reduced to only two lines total (so
>>>>> only one line more than needed), by using
>>>>> -fno-diagnostics-show-caret.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I use that.  I still find that the "note:" lines clutter the
>>>> output and provide zero benefit.
>>>
>>> Does
>>>
>>>  gcc -fcompare-debug-second -fno-diagnostics-show-caret
>>
>> We use the latter.  It doesn't get rid of the 'note' sections,
>> however.
>>
>> For some reason, -fcompare-debug-second is commented out in our
>> Makefile, but it appears that only applies in when a second compile
>> is required.
>
> It appears to have a second "side-effect" use.  It removes notes
> when I use it.

Nice to know.  Thank you for posting it.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

enums and switch vs function calls Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2025-04-05 11:29 +0100
  Re: enums and switch vs function calls scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-04-05 14:58 +0000
    Re: enums and switch vs function calls Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-04-06 03:17 -0700
      Re: enums and switch vs function calls scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-04-06 14:47 +0000
        Re: enums and switch vs function calls David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-04-06 17:16 +0200
        Re: enums and switch vs function calls Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-04-06 19:26 -0700
        Re: enums and switch vs function calls Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2025-04-25 01:12 +0100
          Re: enums and switch vs function calls scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-04-25 16:56 +0000
            Re: enums and switch vs function calls Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2025-04-25 23:09 +0100
              Re: enums and switch vs function calls Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-04 06:55 -0700
        Re: enums and switch vs function calls Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2025-04-25 01:12 +0100
  Re: enums and switch vs function calls David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-04-05 17:43 +0200
  Re: enums and switch vs function calls Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2025-04-05 12:53 -0300
    Re: enums and switch vs function calls David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-04-06 11:49 +0200

csiph-web