aaronpuchert added a comment. In D101566#2891972 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D101566#2891972>, @dblaikie wrote:
> For Rafael - probably because he didn't look at all the cases the warning > does catch & see that it's pretty much entirely no use Right, he didn't suggest this particular fix but another one. > his suggestion was to only detect/warn on explicit instantiations in headers > (where they could produce duplication), which would still be a subset of the > existing warning behavior & a subset that's actionable at least. That's > different from your proposal to invert the warning, which I think is quite > different & not suitable to tie together like this. Though that's an ODR violation independent of the existence of virtual functions. It doesn't have anything to do with weak vtables. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D101566/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D101566 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
