Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!princeton!phoenix!rjchen
From: rjchen@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Raymond Juimong Chen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Pragmas
Message-ID: <1426@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 2 Jan 88 22:24:13 GMT
References: <8801021358.AA15890@decwrl.dec.com>
Reply-To: rjchen@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Raymond Chen)
Organization: Princeton University, NJ
Lines: 27
Summary: Why not just flag it as a warning?

In a famous article, minow@thundr.dec.com (Martin Minow) said:
>According to the Draft Standard, unknown pragmas are to be ignored
>(section 3.8.6 of the Aug. '87 draft).  Because it doesn't distinguish
>mistakes from typographical errors, this is a mistake, and one that the
>Committee seems inordinately fond of: they rejected my request to
>flag unknown pragmas as errors.

Why not flag unknown #pragmas as warnings?  This would allow files to be
compiled, while letting the user know that something may be amiss.
If the user sees things like
	warning: unknown pragma directive: memory_model
	warning: unknown pragma directive: asm
	warning: unknown pragma directive: mispelled
s/he can take appropriate action for each one.  (The first can probably
be ignored safely; the second will cause hair to be pulled out; the third
is the kind of thing we need to catch lest our next spacecraft land in a
rock garden instead of a flat surface.)

Also, has dpANS (or however you capitalize it) made any attempts at
standardizing #pragmas?  To the extent of "If your compiler accepts
#pragma sneeze, then the sneeze option must mean the following: ...",
I mean.  Is this a good idea?  Is it practical?
-- 
Raymond Chen	UUCP: ...allegra!princeton!{pucc|phoenix}!rjchen
		BITNET: 6101695@pucc, rjchen@pucc
		ARPA: rjchen@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU
"Say something, please!  ('Yes' would be best.)" - The Doctor