NoQ added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/Analysis/diagnostics/explicit-suppression.cpp:22
#ifndef SUPPRESSED
- // expected-warning@../Inputs/system-header-simulator-cxx.h:670 {{Called C++
object pointer is null}}
+ // expected-warning@../Inputs/system-header-simulator-cxx.h:677 {{Called C++
object pointer is null}}
#endif
----------------
Szelethus wrote:
> Can't we just change this to `// expected-warning{{Called C++ object pointer
> is null}}`? This file is so tiny, I think it wouldn't cause much confusion,
> and reduces unnecessary maintenance work.
I don't think it'll work. The warning is not on this line, it is in
`system-header-simulator-cxx.h`, so we need to specify it somehow, and it'll
appear only in this test, not in other tests that include that header, so we
can't put it directly into the header.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55307/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55307
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
