aaron.ballman accepted this revision. aaron.ballman added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
The attribute parts LGTM! You can change the `TargetItaniumCXXABI` part in a follow-up commit if you'd prefer. ================ Comment at: lib/AST/Decl.cpp:3945 + return false; + } + ---------------- rjmccall wrote: > 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. Agreed that this makes no sense in C. I was not planning on proposing this to WG14 because I couldn't think of a use case for 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
