rsmith accepted this revision.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaOverload.cpp:10419
@@ -10418,3 +10429,1 @@
- ResultTy) ||
- (!S.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus && TargetType->isVoidPointerType())) {
Matches.push_back(std::make_pair(
----------------
george.burgess.iv wrote:
> rsmith wrote:
> > Why is the `void*` check removed from this case? Note that clang and GCC
> > intentionally treat these two cases differently today:
> >
> > int f();
> > void *p = f; // ok (warning under -pedantic)
> > int *q = f; // warning: incompatible pointer types
> >
> > (That is: the first is a silent-by-default extension and the second is a
> > warn-by-default extension.)
> Because this is overload resolution logic, so we shouldn't care about what
> warnings we will emit :)
>
> This is how we act prior to applying this patch:
>
> ```
> void f(int) __attribute__((overloadable));
> void f(double) __attribute__((overloadable, enable_if(0, "")));
>
> void *fp = f; // OK. This is C and the target is void*.
> void (*fp)(void) = f; // Error. This is C, but the target isn't void*.
> ```
>
> I'm simply removing the "the target must be a `void*`" restriction; the user
> should still get warnings in the latter case (the tests changed in
> test/Sema/pass-object-size.c make sure of this).
OK, this seems fine so long as we somewhere choose exact matches over inexact
ones:
void f(int) __attribute__((overloadable));
void f(int, int) __attribute__((overloadable));
void g(void (*)(int));
void h() { g(f); } // should pick f(int)
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13704
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
