On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:28:36PM -0800, Akira Hatanaka via cfe-commits wrote:
> It triggers in dead branches and so does an initialization of an integer
> variable declared in a function.
I'm more interested in the case of global initialisers here. There is a
long standing history of not checki
It triggers in dead branches and so does an initialization of an integer
variable declared in a function.
I’ll look into fixing it.
> On Jan 11, 2016, at 9:54 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger via cfe-commits
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 05:22:01PM -, Akira Hatanaka via cfe-commits
> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 05:22:01PM -, Akira Hatanaka via cfe-commits wrote:
> Author: ahatanak
> Date: Mon Jan 11 11:22:01 2016
> New Revision: 257357
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=257357&view=rev
> Log:
> [Sema] Issue a warning for integer overflow in struct initializer
>
Author: ahatanak
Date: Mon Jan 11 11:22:01 2016
New Revision: 257357
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=257357&view=rev
Log:
[Sema] Issue a warning for integer overflow in struct initializer
Clang wasn't issuing a warning when compiling the following code:
struct s {
unsigned x;
} s
