v.g.vassilev added a comment. In D143524#4148006 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D143524#4148006>, @philnik wrote:
> The emitted warnings from the libc++ CI look like a false-positive to me. > While the functions are never called, they are used in an unevaluated > context. I would expect `-Wunused` warnings to only be emitted when I can > just remove the code without problems, which doesn't seem to be the case > here. It would probably just get turned off again by lots of people if there > are too many false-positives, which I don't think is the goal here. From what I see is that most of the templates are marked with static which means internal linkage. Entities with internal linkage in header files are essentially different across translation units which is an ODR violation. I believe the discussion here gives more insights of how this works: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29877 Indeed the warning is noisy but it will potentially fix broken code which were unable to diagnose before. Especially that in some cases where static templates in header files are used as an idiom. In theory this approach can extend to cases described in https://wg21.link/p2691 where our inability to diagnose/fix these cases leads to some design decisions which may not be optimal. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D143524/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D143524 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
