inclyc added a comment. > Yeah, that's a different way of delineating than I was thinking originally > and it's worth more thought. I was thinking the separation would be "this is > a VLA" (for people who want to avoid all VLA stack allocations due to the > security concerns) and "this is a portability concern" (for people who want > to port to older language standards, C++, other compilers).
I think it is a good idea to separate `-Wvla` into `-Wvla-portability`(warnings on portability) and `-Wvla-stack` (warnings on stack allocations, security issue). Report `-Wvla-portability` if compilers implementations in practice don't support any `vla` syntax especially in C89 mode and report `-Wvla-stack` if it causes stack allocations. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D132952/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D132952 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
