rogfer01 marked 3 inline comments as done.
================
Comment at: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:5392
@@ -5388,1 +5391,3 @@
+def note_address_of_packed_member_silence : Note<
+ "place parentheses around the '%0' expression to silence this warning">;
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> I don't think this note adds value. Placing parens around the expression does
> silence the warning for false-positives, but that seems more like a
> documentation issue than a diagnostic.
Ditto.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:10537-10538
@@ +10536,4 @@
+ Diag(rhs->getLocStart(), diag::note_address_of_packed_member_silence)
+ << rhs << FixItHint::CreateInsertion(rhs->getLocStart(), "(")
+ << FixItHint::CreateInsertion(rhs->getLocEnd(), ")");
+ break;
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> I do not think this diagnostic should have a FixIt hint. This isn't actually
> *fixing* the problem, it is simply a way to silence the diagnostic while
> retaining the same behavior.
OK. I will remove it.
================
Comment at: test/SemaCXX/address-packed.cpp:92-93
@@ +91,4 @@
+ // expected-warning@-1 {{packed member 'X' of class or structure
'S<float>'}}
+ // expected-note@-2 {{place parentheses around the 'this->X'}}
+ // expected-note@-3 {{place parentheses around the 'this->X'}}
+ }
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> Why `this->X` in the diagnostic when that's not what the user wrote?
Probably clang introduces it internally when parsing an id-expression that
happens to be a nonstatic data member because the diagnostic does include it.
That said this is going away as I'm removing the fix-it.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20561
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
