[cfe-commits] r163429 - /cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp

[Alexander Kornienko]

Douglas, Chandler,

Please, take a look at the updated patch here:
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D38

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> On Sep 8, 2012, at 6:55 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Sep 7, 2012, at 6:44 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Author: alexfh
>>> > Date: Fri Sep  7 17:44:34 2012
>>> > New Revision: 163429
>>> >
>>> > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=163429&view=rev
>>> > Log:
>>> > Fixed http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13777
>>> >
>>> > Modified:
>>> >    cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp
>>> >
>>> > Modified: cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp
>>> > URL:
>>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp?rev=163429&r1=163428&r2=163429&view=diff
>>> >
>>> ==============================================================================
>>> > --- cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp (original)
>>> > +++ cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp Fri Sep  7 17:44:34 2012
>>> > @@ -58,7 +58,9 @@
>>> >     "ast-dump-filter",
>>> >
>>> cl::desc(Options->getOptionHelpText(options::OPT_ast_dump_filter)));
>>> >
>>> > -namespace {
>>> > +// Anonymous namespace here causes problems with gcc <= 4.4 on MacOS:
>>> > +// http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13777
>>> > +// namespace {
>>>
>>> How about just putting it in the clang namespace? At the very least,
>>> please delete the commented-out lines.
>>>
>>
>> Agreed on both fronts. Also, bugs are usually cited just as "PR13777",
>> and almost never cited in the source code, but rather in the test case
>> itself.
>>
>>
>> The reasoning behind this is that the code and comments should stand
>> alone. Nobody should have to hunt through a bug tracker to determine the
>> intent.
>>
> Thanks for the explanation, I didn't know this point.
>
>
>> The test suite, on the other hand, is a mix of feature tests and
>> regression tests that often grows in response to specific bugs, and the
>> cross-linking to those bugs is a valuable addition.
>>
> This is overall a reasonable statement. As for this specific case, I'm not
> sure I can come up with a sane test for this (this is not a functionality
> after all, and the bug is not in the source code, but in an external
> compiler). That's why I decided to put a link to the bug tracker item in
> the source file itself. And the second reason is that I wanted to provide
> more context to those who'll read this code, in addition to the short
> description immediately in comments.
>
>
>> That said, is this really the necessary solution? There are a lot of
>> template arguments defined in an anonymous namespace within the codebase
>> already. How do they work without problems?
>>
>>
>> Yes, this is odd.
>>
> I would suggest, that this can be the only place where a class from an
> unnamed namespace is used as a parameter of a template function, which has
> a local class. But I certainly don't want to find a complete and correct
> proof of this statement. It could be rather time consuming, and I'm sure it
> won't have much value.
>
>
>> I feel like this is an ODR violation waiting to happen unless we put it
>> in an anonymous namespace the way it should be...
>>
>> -Chandler
>>
>>
> --
> Regards,
> Alex
>



-- 
Alexander Kornienko | Software Engineer | alexfh at google.com | +49 151 221
77 957
Google Germany GmbH | Dienerstr. 12 | 80331 München
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20120910/d1f81a59/attachment.html>