On November 24, 2015 7:23:40 AM GMT+01:00, Jan Hubicka <hubi...@ucw.cz> wrote:
>Hi,
Doc talks about COMMON, parm is COMMON_OR_EXTERN.
> static int
>-warn_type_compatibility_p (tree prevailing_type, tree type)
>+warn_type_compatibility_p (tree prevailing_type, tree type,
>+ bool common_or_extern)
> {
> int lev = 0;
>+ bool odr_p = odr_or_derived_type_p (prevailing_type)
>+ && odr_or_derived_type_p (type);
>
>- /* Get complete type.
>- ??? We might want to emit a warning here if type qualification
>- differences were spotted. Do not do this unconditionally though.
> */
>- type = TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type);
>- prevailing_type = TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (prevailing_type);
> if (prevailing_type == type)
> return 0;
>
>- bool odr_p = odr_or_derived_type_p (prevailing_type)
>- && odr_or_derived_type_p (type);
>/* C++ provide a robust way to check for type compatibility via the ODR
> rule. */
> if (odr_p && !odr_types_equivalent_p (prevailing_type, type))
>- lev = 2;
>+ lev |= 2;
>
> /* Function types needs special care, because types_compatible_p never
> thinks prototype is compatible to non-prototype. */
>- if ((TREE_CODE (type) == FUNCTION_TYPE || TREE_CODE (type) ==
>METHOD_TYPE)
>- && TREE_CODE (type) == TREE_CODE (prevailing_type))
>+ if (TREE_CODE (type) == FUNCTION_TYPE || TREE_CODE (type) ==
>METHOD_TYPE)
> {
>+ if (TREE_CODE (type) != TREE_CODE (prevailing_type))
>+ lev |= 1;
> lev |= warn_type_compatibility_p (TREE_TYPE (prevailing_type),
>- TREE_TYPE (type));
>- if (TREE_CODE (type) == METHOD_TYPE)
>+ TREE_TYPE (type), false);
>+ if (TREE_CODE (type) == METHOD_TYPE
>+ && TREE_CODE (prevailing_type))
== what?
Do we have warn_unused_result for macros?
Thanks,
