tbaeder added a comment. In D95536#2557197 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D95536#2557197>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> Hmm... I feel like the diagnostic should already be sufficient to locate the > originating location of the class or namespace and the note is adding a bit > more (almost, but not quite) noise, I guess this makes sense when you're talking about https://godbolt.org/z/1Yo3Pj, but I don't understand how I would know where `OsType` is defined in https://godbolt.org/ in a larger code base (e.g. when using `OsType` in clang, with it being defined in llvm). > Anonymous namespaces: > > namespace foo { > namespace { > void func(); > } > } > > void bar() { > foo::blarg(); // Should point to 'foo'? > } Seems to work: ./enum.cpp:56:8: error: no member named 'blarg' in namespace 'foo' foo::blarg(); // Should point to 'foo'? ~~~~~^ ./enum.cpp:49:11: note: namespace 'foo' declared here namespace foo { ^~~ You list a few more interesting corner cases however. I'm not sure if I want to pursue this patch further as it is already quite ugly because it's touching all those tests. Or if it would be better to implement a note that lists all enum members (up to a certain threshold?), but just for enums. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D95536/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D95536 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
