RFC: gas .warning "msg" and .error "msg" directives?

[Hans-Peter Nilsson]

> From: Ken Raeburn <raeburn@raeburn.org>
> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 01:47:10 -0500

> Why not make it default to something that actually describes the 
> situation, e.g., ".error directive invoked in source file".  
> Conceptually, you could also make the message be required -- for .error 
> that just means you print a slightly different message if it's omitted 
> ("missing .error parameter" for example), the practical difference is 
> whether .warning without a message would be an error or not. :-)

All valid points.  Consider them merged with my suggestion, with:
An .error without a string should be compatible with ".err" and
just emit ".error directive invoked in source file".  A .warning
should just warn, with the default message being...you guessed
it ".warning directive invoked in source file".

brgds, H-P