hans added a comment.
It needs tests for the warnings about badly formed pragmas, and for pragmas
outside file/namespace scope.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Parse/ParsePragma.cpp:3561
<< "intrinsic";
return;
}
----------------
steplong wrote:
> hans wrote:
> > since the above is just a warning, we should probably still call the
> > ActOn.. method?
> Hmm, I'm not sure because all the msgs above are also warnings (diag::warn_)
Yes, but for those, (missing left paren, or unknown intrinsic) it makes sense
to do nothing. If it's just the right paren missing, I don't think it makes
sense to ignore the intrinsic? Can you check how we handle similar situations
with other intrinsics?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaAttr.cpp:1079
+ MSFunctionNoBuiltins.insert(MSFunctionNoBuiltins.end(),
+ NoBuiltins.begin(), NoBuiltins.end());
+}
----------------
steplong wrote:
> hans wrote:
> > Do we want to avoid duplicates in MSFunctionNoBuiltins? Or maybe it doesn't
> > matter?
> Yea, I didn't think it really mattered. I originally wanted to use a set, but
> I needed the strings to be stored in contiguous memory for
> NoBuitinAttr::CreateImplicit() in Sema::AddRangeBasedNoBuiltin()
A set would be nicer conceptually of course.
How about using an llvm::SmallSetVector. That will solve the problem of
duplicates, it will be deterministic, and you can use getArrayRef() to get the
values in contiguous memory, or maybe being() and end() will work too.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D124702/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D124702
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
