/* Should each complaint message be self explanatory, or should we
assume that a series of complaints is being produced? */
-/* case 1: First message of a series that must
- start off with explanation. case 2: Subsequent message of a series
- that needs no explanation (the user already knows we have a problem
- so we can just state our piece). */
enum complaint_series {
/* Isolated self explanatory message. */
ISOLATED_MESSAGE,
+
/* First message of a series, includes an explanation. */
FIRST_MESSAGE,
+
/* First message of a series, but does not need to include any sort
of explanation. */
SHORT_FIRST_MESSAGE,
+
/* Subsequent message of a series that needs no explanation (the
user already knows we have a problem so we can just state our
piece). */
{
struct complain *root;
- /* Should each complaint be self explanatory, or should we assume
- that a series of complaints is being produced? case 0: Isolated
- self explanatory message. case 1: First message of a series that
- must start off with explanation. case 2: Subsequent message of a
- series that needs no explanation (the user already knows we have
- a problem so we can just state our piece). */
- int series;
+ enum complaint_series series;
/* The explanatory messages that should accompany the complaint.
NOTE: cagney/2002-08-14: In a desperate attempt at being vaguely
static struct complaints symfile_complaint_book = {
&complaint_sentinel,
- 0,
+ ISOLATED_MESSAGE,
symfile_explanations
};
struct complaints *symfile_complaints = &symfile_complaint_book;