pxli168 added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:6714
@@ +6713,3 @@
+ if (LangOpts.OpenCLVersion >= 200 && T->isBlockPointerType()) {
+ const BlockPointerType *BlkTy = T->getAs<BlockPointerType>();
+ const FunctionProtoType *FTy =
----------------
Anastasia wrote:
> Yes, but you have to diagnose blocks correctly in all CL versions in which we
> accept blocks. When you come to this point here you should only care about
> checking whether blocks have variadic prototype or not. You should assume the
> parser did the right job to either accept or reject the block declaration
> earlier and also gave the right diagnostic.
>
> It will be responsibility of a parser to correctly accept or reject blocks
> depending on a version. I will prepare a patch for it later on. Please see my
> related comment on the review: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16928
I will change these, if we can restrict -fblock with -cl-std=CL2.x then there
will be no problem by only checking LangOpts.OpenCL
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:6509
@@ +6508,3 @@
+ return QualType();
+ }
+
----------------
Anastasia wrote:
> What is the implication of that? Will we get errors in different order then?
I think we should put operands check after condition check to keep the original
logic.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D17436
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
