ChuanqiXu marked 2 inline comments as done.
ChuanqiXu added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaCoroutine.cpp:1431-1432
+ //
+ // Then AnalysisBasedWarning would emit a warning about `foo()` lacks a
+ // co_return statements.
+ Fallthrough = S.ActOnNullStmt(PromiseRecordDecl->getLocation());
----------------
urnathan wrote:
> Your testcase doesnt show such a warning. This seems unhelpful.
Oh, I need emphasize in the comment that the warning is not correct. I want to
say that if we don't set `FallThrough`, the compiler would emit incorrect
warning. And in this revision, we set `FallThrough` so that we could avoid the
warning. The edited test case could address this.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaCoroutine.cpp:1437-1440
// If the unqualified-id return_void is found, flowing off the end of a
// coroutine is equivalent to a co_return with no operand. Otherwise,
// flowing off the end of a coroutine results in undefined behavior.
Fallthrough = S.BuildCoreturnStmt(FD.getLocation(), nullptr,
----------------
urnathan wrote:
> there's some repetition in the comments. Perhaps a bloc comment before the
> if-else sequence?
Yeah, would do.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D116204/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D116204
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
