[llvm-dev] Questions about ctor/dtor attribute related diagnostics

[Xiangling Liao via llvm-dev]

ping.

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 5:01 PM Xiangling Liao <xiangxdh at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I noticed that there are some diagnostics discrepancies between clang and
> gcc related to `__attribute__((constructor(n)))` and
> `__attribute__((destructor(n)))`.
>
> *[clang]*
> It seems priorities >65535 and <0 on ctor/dtor functions are ignored and
> are set back to default 65535 in clang and Clang only gives an error when >
> 32-bit unsigned value specified.
>
> *[g++]*
> g++ gives an error for any values <0 and >65535.
>
> I am wondering should we let Clang's diagnostics match g++ to make things
> clearer to the user? Or why Clang emits an error for *>32-bit unsigned
> value* only?
>
> Thank you,
> Xiangling
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20201105/bc20766c/attachment.html>