aaron.ballman added a comment.
In D52835#1412416 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D52835#1412416>, @xbolva00 wrote:
> @aaron.ballman does it make sense to warn for this case only in C/pre-C++11
> mode? Since this case in C++11/14/17 is handled by -Wnarrowing, as we see
> from tests.
I don't think so, because code like this still needs the diagnostic even in
C++11 mode, but there's no -Wnarrowing warning for it: `float a1 = (1ULL << 31)
+ 1;`
================
Comment at: test/CXX/dcl.decl/dcl.init/dcl.init.list/p7-0x.cpp:136
Agg<float> f8 = {EnumVal}; // OK
+ // expected-warning@+1 {{implicit conversion from 'int' to 'float' changes
value from 123456789 to 1.2345679E+8}}
Agg<float> f9 = {123456789}; // expected-error {{ cannot be narrowed }}
expected-note {{silence}}
----------------
xbolva00 wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > I don't think we want the warning triggered in either of these cases --
> > they already have an error diagnostic on the same line for the same issue.
> Any recommended way how it should be handled?
Why is it triggering twice in the first place? Template instantiation, maybe?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52835/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52835
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
