arphaman added a comment. Thanks for doing this! I have some comments:
================ Comment at: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1277 +It is possible use the newest SDK but still build a program that can run on +older macOS and iOS versions, by passing ``-mmacosx-version-info=`` / ---------------- possible to use ================ Comment at: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1278 +It is possible use the newest SDK but still build a program that can run on +older macOS and iOS versions, by passing ``-mmacosx-version-info=`` / +``--miphoneos-version-min=``. ---------------- Nit: older versions of macOS or iOS ================ Comment at: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1281 + +Before LLVM 5.0, when calling a function that exists only in the newest OS +version, programmers had to carefully check if the function exists at runtime, ---------------- ...in the OS that's newer than the target OS (as determined by the minimum deployment version), .. ================ Comment at: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1286 +Objective-C methods. If such a check was missed, the program would compile +fine, run fine on the new OS version, but crash on older OS versions. + ---------------- NIT: run fine on newer systems, but crash on older systems. ================ Comment at: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1291 +with the new ``@available()`` keyword to assist with this issue. If a function +is called that exists on new OS versions while the minimum deployment version +is older, then ``-Wunguarded-availability`` will fire: ---------------- I would reword this sentence like this: When a method that's introduced in the OS newer than the target OS is called, a `-Wunguarded-availability` warning is emitted if that call is not guarded: ================ Comment at: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1303 + +To fix the warning (and to make the call not crash on 10.11!), wrap it in +``if(@available())``: ---------------- Nit: and to avoid the crash on macOS 10.11 ================ Comment at: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1342 +``@available()`` is only available in Objective-C code. To use the feature +in C and C++ files, use the ``__builtin_available()`` spelling instead. + ---------------- Nit: in C and C++ code ================ Comment at: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1347 + +In rare cases, the availability annotation on an API might be overly +conservative. For example, ``[NSProcessInfo processInfo]`` secretly responds to ---------------- We don't want to encourage usage of undocumented/private APIs before they are officially made public for a number of reasons. Can you please remove or rewrite this paragraph (ideally removing/replacing the specific example)? https://reviews.llvm.org/D35379 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
