rjmccall added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/AST/Decl.cpp:3937
+ // -- [has] virtual member functions or virtual base classes, or
+ // -- has subobjects of nonzero size or bit-fields of nonzero length
+ if (const auto *CXXRD = dyn_cast<CXXRecordDecl>(RD)) {
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> rjmccall wrote:
> > Surely a bit-field of nonzero length is a subobject of nonzero size.
> Usually, but not if it's unnamed (unnamed bit-fields aren't subobjects). In
> any case, this is a quote from the C++ standard.
Fair enough.
================
Comment at: lib/AST/Decl.cpp:3945
+ return false;
+ }
+
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> rjmccall wrote:
> > Is this a C/C++ modules interaction?
> We don't allow C modules to be imported into C++ compilations or vice versa,
> so this should be unreachable unless we start allowing the attribute in C.
> Nice catch.
>
> I guess the question is, then: should we allow this attribute in C (either
> with a GNU `__attribute__` spelling or as a C20 `[[clang::attribute]]`)? I
> don't think it's really useful in C (empty structs are ill-formed, and you
> can't reuse tail padding because structs are always trivial, at least in
> standard C), so I'm inclined to say no.
I agree that it seems relatively useless in C, and there's no reason to think
they'd use this language design if they decided they did want it.
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D63451/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D63451
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
