> On Jan 29, 2016, at 6:02 AM, Aaron Ballman <aaron.ball...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> aaron.ballman added a subscriber: aaron.ballman.
> aaron.ballman added a reviewer: aaron.ballman.
> aaron.ballman added a comment.
> 
> It's a bit strange to add an attribute that has absolutely no semantic effect 
> whatsoever. Where is this attribute intended to be queried within the 
> compiler? Are there additional functionality patches coming for this?

Yes there is a forthcoming patch for CodeGen which will place an attribute on 
the relevant functions. The attribute will be queried in the middle end 
optimizer. The reason why there has been a bit of a delay is I realized I 
wanted to talk to a few more people about this attribute internally.

We may want to expand its use to essentially mean "no-arc", i.e. this is a c 
function that uses pure c-code.

There are other possibilities as well.

> 
> 
> ================
> Comment at: include/clang/Basic/Attr.td:540
> @@ +539,3 @@
> +  let Subjects = SubjectList<[Function]>;
> +  let Documentation = [Undocumented];
> +}
> ----------------
> Please, no undocumented new attributes. You should modify AttrDocs.td and 
> include that reference here.

I was just following the model of the code that was already there and 
documented the attribute in a comment above the attribute.

I am fine with adding specific documentation for the attribute.

> 
> ================
> Comment at: test/SemaObjC/attr-cf_no_release.m:31
> @@ +30,2 @@
> +                  void *d CF_NO_RELEASE, // 
> expected-warning{{'cf_no_release' attribute only applies to functions}}
> +                  CFFooRef e CF_NO_RELEASE); // 
> expected-warning{{'cf_no_release' attribute only applies to functions}}
> ----------------
> Not that lots of test are bad, but a lot of these tests are duplicates and 
> can be removed. For instance, really only need one test for ObjC methods, one 
> for properties, one for params, etc. It would be good to add a test ensuring 
> that the attribute accepts no arguments.

Ok.

Michael

> 
> 
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D16708
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to