aaron.ballman added a comment.
Do we have evidence of false positive vs true positive rates for this catching
actual problems in real world code? I realize that this is for GCC
compatibility, but because it's default-off, I'm wondering where the utilities
lies.
================
Comment at: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticIDs.h:39
DIAG_SIZE_CROSSTU = 100,
- DIAG_SIZE_SEMA = 3500,
+ DIAG_SIZE_SEMA = 3600,
DIAG_SIZE_ANALYSIS = 100,
----------------
xbolva00 wrote:
> riccibruno wrote:
> > xbolva00 wrote:
> > > @rsmith maybe this should be a separate patch? I hit this limit in this
> > > patch.
> > Is there any downside to just bumping it to, say, 4000 ?
> I think it is fine to bump it more..
I think it should be done in a separate patch, and I agree that we should bump
to 4000 for right now to give us some wiggle room.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D61288/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D61288
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
