aaron.ballman added a comment. In D134461#3815502 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D134461#3815502>, @nathanchance wrote:
> In D134461#3815458 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D134461#3815458>, @aaron.ballman > wrote: > >> What do folks think of that idea? > > I think that all sounds reasonable to me (although I am far from an authority > on these matters). As far as I understand it, the kernel cannot use > `-pedantic` due to its liberal use of GNU C extensions so moving those > specific constructs to a `-pedantic` version of the warning will be the same > as just turning them off altogether, which obviously works fine for us. I am > happy to take the suggested changes for a spin against the kernel once a > patch is available to see if there are any other interesting places where > this warning triggers to make sure it does not need further adjustment, since > we openly welcome new diagnostics. Right now, it is pretty much impossible to > sift through them all because of how often it fires. Thank you for the offer! @junaire -- would you like to try making the changes? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D134461/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D134461 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
