================
@@ -692,6 +692,13 @@ def warn_maybe_falloff_nonvoid_function : Warning<
def warn_falloff_nonvoid_function : Warning<
"non-void function does not return a value">,
InGroup<ReturnType>;
+def warn_const_attr_with_pure_attr : Warning<
+ "'const' attribute imposes more restrictions, 'pure' attribute ignored">,
+ InGroup<IgnoredAttributes>;
+def warn_pure_function_returns_void : Warning<
+ "'%select{pure|const}0' attribute on function returning 'void', attribute
ignored">,
+ InGroup<IgnoredAttributes>;
----------------
AaronBallman wrote:
```suggestion
def warn_const_attr_with_pure_attr : Warning<
"'const' attribute imposes more restrictions; 'pure' attribute ignored">,
InGroup<IgnoredAttributes>;
def warn_pure_function_returns_void : Warning<
"'%select{pure|const}0' attribute on function returning 'void'; attribute
ignored">,
InGroup<IgnoredAttributes>;
```
minor nit for consistency with other related diagnostics.
Btw, to be explicit, I think it's reasonable that we do not reuse the usual
"mutually exclusive attributes" functionality here because we have a very
specific way to correct this situation whereas the usual behavior for mutual
exclusion is that the first one wins. So adding a new diagnostic and using
custom logic is appropriate IMO.
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
