erichkeane added a comment.
still on vaca, but doing a drive-by.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td:1798
+def NoUniqueAddressMSVC : InheritableAttr,
TargetSpecificAttr<TargetMicrosoftCXXABI> {
+ let Spellings = [CXX11<"msvc", "no_unique_address", 201803>];
+ let Subjects = SubjectList<[NonBitField], ErrorDiag>;
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> I was a bit shocked to learn that this really is the correct return value for
> `__has_cpp_attribute`: https://godbolt.org/z/MW9q1hPEh
Thats... interesting....horrifying... else?
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td:1797
+def NoUniqueAddressMSVC : InheritableAttr,
TargetSpecificAttr<TargetMicrosoftCXXABI> {
+ let Spellings = [CXX11<"msvc", "no_unique_address", 201803>];
----------------
I think I would combine this and the one above as a single attribute. Then,
only 'add' it in SemaDeclAttr.cpp when the spelling is the appropriate one for
the current target. IMO, msvc::no_unique_address should ONLY be valid in MSVC
mode, else we encourage its propagation.
We don't need it to be a 'TargetSpecificAttr', just do the 'ignored' warning in
the handler in SemaDeclAttr.td.
The accessor that we need is to just query which spelling.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Decl.cpp:4477
+bool FieldDecl::hasNoUniqueAddress() const {
+ return hasAttr<NoUniqueAddressAttr>() || hasAttr<NoUniqueAddressMSVCAttr>();
----------------
This ends up going away if we combine them.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D157762/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D157762
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
