erichkeane added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/ASTContext.cpp:11243
// We really shouldn't be making a no-proto type here.
+ if (ArgTypes.empty() && Variadic && !getLangOpts().StrictPrototypes)
----------------
How tough would it be to change this to represent always as a C++-esque
`foo(...)` prototype, just always?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:8821
(!R->getAsAdjusted<FunctionType>() && R->isFunctionProtoType());
+ assert(SemaRef.getLangOpts().StrictPrototypes
+ ? HasPrototype
----------------
This assert is quite strange, particularly with the string part of it only in
the 'else' of the conditional? It seems you're trying to ensure that:
"if strictProtoTypes, assert hasProtoType"?
In that case, I'd likely suggest:
`assert((HasProtoType || !SemeaRef.getLangOpts().StrictPrototypes) && "Strict
prototypes are required");`
================
Comment at: clang/test/Parser/c2x-attributes.c:64
+ c2x-warning 2 {{type specifier missing,
defaults to 'int'}} \
+ c2x-error {{expected ';' after top level
declarator}} \
+ c2x-error {{expected identifier or '('}}
----------------
This is an unfortunate change in diagnostic quality.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D123955/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D123955
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
