jyknight added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47894#1158811, @manojgupta wrote:
> @efriedma @jyknight Does the change match your expectations where warnings > are still generated but codeGen does not emit nonnull attribute? Yes, this seems sensible IMO. ================ Comment at: include/clang/Driver/Options.td:1080 +def fdelete_null_pointer_checks : Flag<["-"], + "fdelete-null-pointer-checks">, Group<f_Group>; +def fno_delete_null_pointer_checks : Flag<["-"], ---------------- Do we need help text for this one too? ================ Comment at: test/CodeGen/nonnull.c:1-2 -// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple x86_64-apple-darwin -emit-llvm < %s | FileCheck %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple x86_64-apple-darwin -emit-llvm < %s | FileCheck -check-prefix=PREFIX-NONNULL %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple x86_64-apple-darwin -emit-llvm -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks < %s | FileCheck -check-prefix=PREFIX-NO-NULL %s ---------------- These prefixes are very confusingly named. NONNULL and NO-NULL sound like the same thing. I'd suggest using, across all the files here, CHECK: NULL-INVALID: NULL-VALID: That'd also avoid the need to rename all the "CHECK" lines to something else, which is most of the diff in these files. ================ Comment at: test/Sema/nonnull.c:2 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks -verify %s // rdar://9584012 ---------------- manojgupta wrote: > All warnings are still issued if nullptr is passed to function nonnull > attribute. SGTM, but this should be a comment in the file, not the code review. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D47894 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
