aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Preprocessor/line-directive-system-headers.c:1-2
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c99 -fsyntax-only -pedantic -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c99 -fsyntax-only -pedantic -verify=system
-Wsystem-headers %s
+
----------------
There's nothing specific to C99 that I can see in the test, so I think these
can be dropped.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Preprocessor/line-directive-system-headers.c:19-21
+# 42 "foo" 2 3 4
+// expected-error@-1 {{invalid line marker flag '2': cannot pop empty include
stack}}
+// system-error@-2 {{invalid line marker flag '2': cannot pop empty include
stack}}
----------------
Might as well make this consistent with the other parts of the test and use
`@#6` instead of `@-1`. Same applies elsewhere.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Preprocessor/line-directive-system-headers.c:40-50
+// no expected warning.
+// system-warning@#8 {{this style of line directive is a GNU extension}}
+typedef int y;
+// no expected warning.
+// system-note@-2 {{previous definition is here}}
+typedef int y;
+// no expected warning.
----------------
Let's change "no expected warning" into "Warnings silenced when
-Wsystem-headers isn't passed." so it sounds less like "we don't expect the
warning directly below this comment to happen".
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D124534/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D124534
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
