aaron.ballman accepted this revision. aaron.ballman added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM aside from a few small issues to fix. ================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:893 +def err_pragma_pack_identifer_not_supported : Error< + "specifying an identifier within pragma pack is not supported, identifier is ignored">; def err_section_conflict : Error<"%0 causes a section type conflict with %1">; ---------------- The identifier is no longer ignored now that this is an error rather than a warning. ================ Comment at: clang/test/Sema/aix-pragma-pack-and-align.c:231 + +// expected-no-warning ---------------- Xiangling_L wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > Is this comment intentional? > Yes, my intention is to test no pragma pack or prama align is unterminated. I don't think we have such a construct that's checked by `-verify` (and if we did, I'd say the test file is broken because it contains `expected-warning` comments). Because you're passing `-verify`, any warnings that are triggered on a line without a matching `expected-warning` comment will be reported as a test failure, so you can safely remove this comment and still get the test coverage you want. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87702/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87702 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
