lebedev.ri added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45766#1101533, @ksu.shadura wrote:
> Thanks for your opinion, your guess was right! It is a unit-test, so seems we > need to try to suppress warnings on our side. Ok, great that this time it got resolved this trivially! > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45766#1098823, @Quuxplusone wrote: > >> (That said, I continue to think that this diagnostic produces more noise >> than signal, and wish it weren't in `-Wall`...) Too bad there is no way to track how many true-positives it produces. Anecdotal evidence: it just prevented me from wasting time trying to understand what is going on during https://reviews.llvm.org/D46602 development, so sure, it can have false-positive noise, but.. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D45766 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
