lebedev.ri requested changes to this revision. lebedev.ri added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50805#1202578, @Meinersbur wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50805#1201956, @Quuxplusone wrote: > > > If you added a new option `-Wret-addr-label` as suggested above (for a > > total patch of +2 lines), then is it accurate to say: > > > > - if `-Wret-addr-label` was enabled by default, we know of at least one > > codebase that would pass `-Wno-ret-addr-label` to their build > > - if `-Wret-addr-label` was disabled by default, we don't know of any > > codebases that would voluntarily enable it And if nobody would enable it > > voluntarily... might as well eliminate it, right? > > > That nobody here can name a project that would enable it, does not mean that > there is none, or that projects will decide in the future to use it, or that > individual developers temporarily use. Besides, it'd be enabled by > `-Weverything`. +1 i **strongly** believe this should just be adding a new diag group, not completely dropping the diagnostic. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D50805 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
