Given the following two function declarations: void f1(...); void f2();
It makes sense to me that isVariadic() returns true for f1 in both C and C++. It makes sense to me that isVariadic() returns false for f2 in C++. I am confused as to why it returns false instead of true for C, however. In C11, 6.7.6.3p9 states: If the list terminates with an ellipsis (, ...), no information about the number or types of the parameters after the comma is supplied. p14 states, in part: "The empty list in a function declarator that is not part of a definition of that function specifies that no information about the number or types of the parameters is supplied." It seems to me that for function *declarations* (not definitions), isVariadic() should return true for f2 in C. Is there a reason it doesn't currently behave that way, or is this a bug? I ask because I was writing an AST matcher for isVariadic() for an in-progress checker, but the checker was failing to catch that f2 was a variadic function. I am not certain whether FunctionDecl::isVariadic() should be changed, whether the AST matcher isVariadic() should be smarter about C code, or whether the checker itself needs to be smarter about this particular behavior in C code. My gut reaction is that FunctionDecl::isVariadic() has a bug, but from looking at code elsewhere, everything seems to assume isVariadic() implies the ellipsis, which makes me think I just need to make my checker smarter. Thanks! ~Aaron _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
