Hi Richard,
Please drop this patch.
I think the warning triggered correctly on the following snippet:
int f(char *value);
int f(const std::string &name) { return listAttr(name.c_str()); }
I forgot that name.c_str() returns a const char*, which is implicitly converted.
vedant
On Jul 29, 2015, at 5:09 PM, Richard Trieu <[email protected]> wrote:
> Vedant,
>
> I have tried the example in your test case and could not get a spurious
> warning from it. Further, having two different functions map to the same
> canonical function decl would be problematic for Clang. Can you give any
> more information about where you saw this spurious warning?
>
> Richard
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Vedant Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sema::checkRecursiveFunction() currently cannot tell overloaded functions
> apart.
>
> This results in spurious warnings -- clang claims that a function is
> infinitely recursive when it in fact just calls a different function. The
> attached patch fixes the problem by keeping the original FunctionDecl around,
> instead of switching to the 'canonical' decl.
>
> I don't have commit rights, so I'd appreciate someone taking a look at the
> patch and guiding it into trunk :).
>
> vedant
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>
>
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
