emmettneyman added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:3533-3541 +def err_require_designated_init_failed : Error< + "variable declaration does not use designated initializer syntax">; +def note_declared_required_designated_init_here : Note< + "required by 'require_designated_init' attribute here">; + +def err_required_failed : Error< + "initializer for variable %0 must explicitly initialize field %1">; ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > I'm a little uncomfortable with these being errors rather than warnings. I > think of these attributes as being preferences rather than requirements; the > code isn't *wrong* if it fails to use the designated initializer (it's > conforming to C or C++, does not have UB, etc) and other implementations are > free to ignore those attributes and the end result will be identical to > what's produced by Clang. > > What do you think about turning these into warnings? Users can always use > `-Werror` to strengthen their own requirements. That makes sense, I'll make the change. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64380/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64380 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
