[cfe-dev] Incomplete set of warnings in clang
Richard Trieu
rtrieu at google.com
Mon Mar 10 12:22:38 PDT 2014
Marshall,
Equality comparisons appear to have their own subset of -Wunused-value in
-Wunused-comparison. -Wunused-comparison checks both builtin and
overloaded == and !=, which is the two warnings you saw. For the
relational operators, -Wunused-value does not check for overloaded
operators. So a < comparison of int's would trigger -Wunused-value
warnings while a < comparison of iterators would not. This looks like an
oversight from when the warning was implemented. I think the fix is to
move the relational comparisons into -Wunused-comparison so that relational
overloads will also be warned on.
Richard.
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote:
> (CC-ing our local warnings expert...)
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> As I was working on a libc++ issue (
>> 2263. Comparing iterators and allocator pointers with different
>> const-character), if anyone cares, I wrote the following test program:
>>
>> #include <string>
>>
>> int main() {
>> std::string::iterator it;
>> std::string::const_iterator cit;
>>
>> it == cit;
>> it != cit;
>> it < cit;
>> it <= cit;
>> it > cit;
>> it >= cit;
>> }
>>
>> I wanted to make sure that these were all legal comparisons using libc++
>> (and they are).
>> I kind of expected some compiler warnings about “unused results” or
>> something.
>>
>> What I didn’t expect was to get _two_ warnings. I figured either zero or
>> some multiple of six.
>>
>> Apparently clang doesn’t like it if you don’t use the result of == or !=,
>> but is perfectly happy with ignoring the results of >, >=, <, <=.
>>
>> Why is that?
>>
>> — Marshall
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20140310/87c96714/attachment.html>
More information about the cfe-dev
mailing list