[PATCH] D45766: [Sema] Add -Wno-self-assign-overloaded

[John McCall via llvm-commits]

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 6:32 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 3:29 PM John McCall via Phabricator <
> reviews at reviews.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> rjmccall added a comment.
>>
>> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45766#1076176, @dblaikie wrote:
>>
>> > Is there anything else in the "-w" namespace other than the literal
>> "-w" so
>> >  far?
>>
>>
>> No. This would be novel.
>>
>
> Ah, I see.
>
>
>> > I mean, I could imagine it might make more sense to default these
>> warnings
>> >  off & users can turn them on for non-test code, potentially? So
>> >  "-Wnon-test" might make sense.
>>
>> That's an interesting idea, but it's still not a warning group, because
>> you shouldn't get the self-assign warnings unless `-Wself-assign` is
>> enabled.
>>
>
> You shouldn't?
>

I wouldn't think so.  Remember that the goal of the option is to be a
single thing that users can add to their unit-test CFLAGS to disable these
noisy-in-tests cases.  So if we add an opt-in/experimental
`-Wunpredictable-foozits` warning, and it has a unit-test carve-out,
passing `-wtest -wno-test` or whatever shouldn't turn on the carved-out
special case of `-Wunpredictable-foozits`.

It's probably not the worst thing to just use a `-W` spelling anyway; not
everything in that namespace is (e.g. `-Werror`).  It could be
`-Wnoisy-in-tests` and `-Wno-noisy-in-tests`, with a documentation note
that `-Wnoisy-in-tests` is just a cancellation of `-Wno-noisy-in-tests` and
doesn't actually enable any warnings by itself.  We could have the
diagnostic printer add `-Wnoisy-in-tests` to the diagnostic-group
annotation for diagnostics that would be suppressed under
`-Wno-noisy-in-tests`, analogously to how it adds `-Werror` for diagnostics
that have been promoted to an error.

John.


> But yeah, it's tricky either way - either you get them all, then opt out
> of all the warnings for test code you don't generally want.
>
> I'll leave it to you, then - don't feel too strongly. Maybe worth seeing
> if Richard has an opinion, but up to you.
>
> - Dave
>
>
>>
>>
>> Repository:
>>   rL LLVM
>>
>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D45766
>>
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20180423/9aed84d9/attachment.html>