hintonda added a comment. In D61827#1499160 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D61827#1499160>, @lebedev.ri wrote:
> This will now trigger on https://godbolt.org/z/9oFMcB right? > Just want to point out that this will then have "false-positives" when that > loop > is an OpenMP for loop, since range-for loop is not available until OpenMP 5. > > I don't think this false-positive can be avoided though, if building without > `-fopenmp` there won't be anything about OpenMP in AST, > and thus no way to detect this case.. Could you suggest a simple test case that could be added to the test? That way, instead of just removing the `if else` block, @torbjoernk could try to handle it. Or perhaps exclude it from the match altogether. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61827/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61827 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
