aaron.ballman accepted this revision. aaron.ballman added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
In D58896#1428816 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D58896#1428816>, @edward-jones wrote: > In D58896#1419964 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D58896#1419964>, @aaron.ballman > wrote: > > > Do you have some evidence that the current behavior is causing a lot of > > false positives in the wild? For ASCII character literals, I can sort of > > guess at why people might want to do this, but for things like wide > > character literals, or character literals relying on the current code page, > > etc, I'm less convinced. > > > I don't know about the false positive rate, just the one report on twitter > which triggered me to submit this change. As for wide character literals I > was under the impression that they would be promoted to integers and wouldn't > have triggered the -Wchar-subscript anyway? Ordinary character literals are promoted as well, aren't they? `'a'` has type `char`, and that should promote up to `int`. My point was that you are silencing the warning on any character literal, not just ordinary character literals. However, I see now that `-Wchar-subscript` is very serious about `char`, rather than any character type, so I guess you don't need to distinguish between character literal kinds because the type system already deals with that for you. LGTM! Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58896/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58896 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
