ahatanak added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp:2096 + if (FI.getExtParameterInfo(ArgNo).isNoEscape()) + Attrs.addAttribute(llvm::Attribute::NoCapture); + ---------------- rjmccall wrote: > ahatanak wrote: > > rjmccall wrote: > > > You should make sure that building a CGFunctionInfo with an > > > ObjCMethodDecl* collects this from the parameters. (And add tests!) > > > > > > For blocks, at least, the ObjC method case is arguably more important > > > than the C function case. > > Should we issue a warning when a parameter of an ObjC method is annotated > > with noescape and the corresponding parameter of the overriding method in a > > derived class isn't? Also, should we warn about inconsistent C++ virtual > > functions too? > Mmm. Probably yes in both cases, although we could alternatively just > silently propagate the attribute InheritableParamAttr-style. In the new patch, I chose to print diagnostics when the overriding method is missing noescape on its parameters lest users unintentionally let pointers escape. https://reviews.llvm.org/D32210 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
