rsmith added inline comments.

================
Comment at: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:7907
@@ -7904,1 +7906,3 @@
+def ext_opencl_ext_vector_type_rgba_selector: ExtWarn<
+  "vector component name '%0' is an OpenCL version 2.2 feature">;
 } // end of sema category
----------------
As mentioned, normal Clang policy is to issue an `ExtWarn` in such cases unless 
there is some actual problem with accepting the feature as an extension. This 
*does* cause us to produce a diagnostic, which, as you say, is important.

The C and C++ standards are both clear that producing a diagnostic is a 
sufficient response to code that is ill-formed, and that we are still allowed 
to accept the program after producing the diagnostic; if the OpenCL 
specification says something else, it is simply broken and we should get it 
fixed.

================
Comment at: test/Misc/warning-flags.c:15-19
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
 
     If you add a new warning without a flag, this test will fail.  To fix
     this test, simply add a warning group to that warning.
 
 
 The list of warnings below should NEVER grow.  It should gradually shrink to 0.
 
----------------
Please follow these instructions.


http://reviews.llvm.org/D20602



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to