aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Parse/ParsePragma.cpp:15-17
#include "clang/Basic/TargetInfo.h"
+#include "clang/Lex/LexDiagnostic.h"
#include "clang/Lex/Preprocessor.h"
----------------
Endill wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> >
> I'm using `warn_pragma_debug_unexpected_argument` and
> `warn_pragma_debug_missing_argument` from there as well, and not just added
> diagnostics. What should I do about that? Copying them over to
> `DiagnosticParseKinds.td` doesn't work.
Ah, those should move into `DiagnosticCommonKinds.td` under the `// Parse &&
Lex` heading, then they should be available from here as well without the extra
include.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Parse/ParsePragma.cpp:731-736
+ } else if (E.get()->isTypeDependent()) {
+ PP.Diag(StartLoc, diag::warn_pragma_debug_type_dependent_argument)
+ << SourceRange(StartLoc, Tok.getLocation());
+ } else if (E.get()->isValueDependent()) {
+ PP.Diag(StartLoc, diag::warn_pragma_debug_value_dependent_argument)
+ << SourceRange(StartLoc, Tok.getLocation());
----------------
Endill wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> >
> I see quite a lot of items inside `ExprDependence`. Are you sure we don't
> miss any corner cases by using `isValueDependent()` to select between value-
> and type-dependent diagnostic text?
I was trying to think of a case where we'd run into problems, but I can't come
up with one, so I believe we're fine here.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D144115/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D144115
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
