v.g.vassilev marked an inline comment as done. v.g.vassilev added a comment.
In D143524#4148039 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D143524#4148039>, @philnik wrote: > In D143524#4148024 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D143524#4148024>, @v.g.vassilev > wrote: > >> 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. > > I missed the `static` at the beginning. That explains the warning, thanks! I > agree this should be fixed. I'll look into making a patch to enable > `-Wunused-template` and fix any problems. Hopefully there aren't too many. This would be awesome as I don't have a lot of bandwidth right now and that potentially will have quite positive impact (once people understand what they need to do). I am not sure if we could somehow emit a fix-it suggestion. So far I have failed in figuring out what's a good suggestion when using this static template idiom... 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
