[cfe-commits] r45976 - in /cfe/trunk: AST/Type.cpp test/Sema/complex-int.c
snaroff at apple.com
Mon Jan 14 15:12:02 PST 2008
On Jan 14, 2008, at 2:46 PM, Neil Booth wrote:
> Steve Naroff wrote:-
>> Author: snaroff
>> Date: Mon Jan 14 15:38:57 2008
>> New Revision: 45976
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=45976&view=rev
>> Teach Type::isIntegerType() about GCC's __complex__ integer
>> Bug submitted by Eli.
>> Modified: cfe/trunk/AST/Type.cpp
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/AST/Type.cpp?rev=45976&r1=45975&r2=45976&view=diff
>> --- cfe/trunk/AST/Type.cpp (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/AST/Type.cpp Mon Jan 14 15:38:57 2008
>> @@ -310,6 +310,9 @@
>> if (const TagType *TT = dyn_cast<TagType>(CanonicalType))
>> if (TT->getDecl()->getKind() == Decl::Enum)
>> return true;
>> + // Check for GCC complex integer extension.
>> + if (const ComplexType *CT = dyn_cast<ComplexType>(CanonicalType))
>> + return CT->getElementType()->isIntegerType();
>> if (const VectorType *VT = dyn_cast<VectorType>(CanonicalType))
>> return VT->getElementType()->isIntegerType();
>> return false;
> I think this is a *really* bad idea opening up endless bugs.
Just to be clear, my goal isn't to open up endless bugs. I've fixed
*many* bugs in clang over the past year and try to be careful when
making such changes.
Every time anyone touches some code, there is a chance of a regression
(especially since GCC extensions aren't wildly well specified).
Apparently I just created a regression. Thanks for bringing it to my
> It seems we accept complex ints and vectors of ints wherever
> we accept an int, such as a switch condition, etc.
More information about the cfe-commits