aaron.ballman added a comment. In D66364#1635863 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D66364#1635863>, @ldionne wrote:
> In D66364#1635814 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D66364#1635814>, @aaron.ballman > wrote: > > > [ ...] > > > > Adding some libc++ maintainers to see if they have opinions. > > > > `__extension__` is one option. Could we get away with push/pop disabling of > > the diagnostic? Or perhaps this is a situation where we should not diagnose > > use within a system header in the first place, because that's part of the > > implementation? > > > I just learned about `__extension__`, but from my perspective it makes sense > to mark uses of `_Atomic` with `__extension__` (or disable the warning with a > `#pragma`) inside libc++ if we're using something non-standard for the > current dialect. I don't think Clang should bend its back for libc++ in this > case. Okay, that's good feedback, thank you! Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D66364/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D66364 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
