jfb added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/Driver/Driver.cpp:1406 + // for SIGPIPE. Do not print diagnostics for this case. + if (Res == 71) + continue; ---------------- nickdesaulniers wrote: > jfb wrote: > > jfb wrote: > > > Ditto on magical number in a header. > > I think you want to create a new diagnostic here for "broken pipe" before > > the `continue`. > Won't the diagnostic always be printed then? I thought we were trying to > silence all related warnings? It is an error that I think we want to report, but we don't want to ask for a bug report. So I think we want to avoid printing the long bug report error message, but we want to say "Broken pipe" which seems to be the standard Unix thing to do. Not my area of expertise though, maybe someone has a different opinion? Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D53001 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
