karka228 wrote: > Note that PR [74440](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74440) > contains a review comment that the following property would be good: > "diagnostic text shows the name of the warning flag (in case you need to look > it up or disable it)" That being said, this change removes the gcc-compatible > point 6 which is that the diagnostics are associated with -Wformat. There was > a remark about the strangeness of this, and it fact this interferes with the > accuracy of work I am doing to categorize warnings that might fire in my > company's codebase if enabled.
I think we all agree that the way gcc implemented this from the beginning is strange and that implied that the implementation in clang also is strange. I think I leave this up to @AaronBallman to decide if the gcc-compatible in point 6 which is that the diagnostics are associated with -Wformat, discussed in the original PR [74440](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74440), is important or not. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150962 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
