inclyc added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Sema/warn-vla.c:8-12
+void test2(int n, int v[n]) { // c99 no-warning
+#if __STDC_VERSION__ < 199901L
+// expected-warning@-2{{variable length arrays are a C99 feature}}
+#endif
}
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> The diagnostic there is rather unfortunate because we're not using a
> variable-length array in this case.
Emm, I'm not clear about whether we should consider this a VLA, and generates
`-Wvla-extensions`. Is `v[n]` literally a variable-length array? (in source
code) So it seems to me that we should still report c89 incompatibility
warnings?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D132952/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D132952
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
