[llvm-commits] [llvm-gcc-4.2] r45054 - /llvm-gcc-4.2/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/930411-1.c

[Dale Johannesen]

On Dec 16, 2007, at 2:02 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:

>
> On Dec 16, 2007, at 1:59 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
>
>>> I definitely agree, which is why I added it in the first place :).
>>> The problem is that it isn't hooked up with any of the other
>>> diagnostics machinery, so it isn't controllable and doesn't give
>>> decent location info (for example).
>>>
>>> I don't know that it really provides a good user experience.  In the
>>> LTO case with debug info, we could do better.
>>
>> So what's your idea, detect it somewhere else?  Where were you
>> thinking?
>
> For now I think we just just disable the warning.

I'd prefer to wait until the replacement is in place, if you're OK  
with that.

> In the future, this could naturally be handled with Ted's work on
> static analysis stuff.  The nice thing about doing it at the source
> level is that you can detect mismatches that are broken in more subtle
> ways as well, such as int foo()  vs long foo().  You also get good
> diagnostics hooks and location info.
>
> -Chris
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits