Anastasia accepted this revision.
Anastasia added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM! Thanks!
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaOpenCL/fdeclare-opencl-builtins.cl:27
+ // expected-error@-3 0+{{no matching function for call to 'barrier'}}
+ // expected-error@* {{typedef type cl_mem_fence_flags not found; include the
base header with -finclude-default-header}}
+}
----------------
svenvh wrote:
> Anastasia wrote:
> > Actually, could we remove the `typedef` from the diagnostic because it
> > exposes the implementation details unnecessarily? I believe the spec
> > doesn't say what the type is aside from enums? As a matter of fact, we
> > have some types implemented as typedefs that should have been a native
> > types e.g. vector types that we might change one day.
> I agree it's an implementation detail, but I can see reasons for keeping it:
> when there is an enum type with the same name available in the translation
> unit, then the message "type X not found" is not completely correct, because
> a type X exists, but it is of the wrong type. By prefixing "enum" or
> "typedef", the diagnostic is more accurate. This diagnostic is mainly
> targeted at Clang developers actually, because a user shouldn't see this
> diagnostic in any normal use case (with the driver setting both
> -fdeclare-opencl-builtins and -finclude-default-header).
Ah, I see. Since the diagnostics are not going to be exposed during normal
compilation it is less critical indeed... I guess the only issue is when we
update the type implementation we might need more tests to change.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D96051/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D96051
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
