================
@@ -11792,6 +11792,32 @@ static bool CheckMultiVersionFunction(Sema &S,
FunctionDecl *NewFD,
OldDecl, Previous);
}
+static void CheckFunctionDeclarationAttributesUsage(Sema &S,
+ FunctionDecl *NewFD) {
+ const bool is_pure = NewFD->hasAttr<PureAttr>();
+ const bool is_const = NewFD->hasAttr<ConstAttr>();
+
+ if (is_pure && is_const) {
+ S.Diag(NewFD->getLocation(), diag::warn_const_attr_with_pure_attr);
+ NewFD->dropAttr<PureAttr>();
+ }
+ if (is_pure || is_const) {
+ if (isa<CXXConstructorDecl>(NewFD)) {
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
I don't agree that a constructor 'returns a value'. Both a constructor and a
destructor are the same in that they are functions that modify their 1st
parameter (the this parameter) or 'throw'. They are effectively the same thing.
I don't see how a constructor could ever make sense with 'pure', same as it
doesn't make sense on destructors.
We should be handling them the same.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78200
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
