pskrgag wrote: > Do you want to extend the scope of this PR to add some minimal docs to the > attribute? > If not, that's also fine, we will create a separate ticket for adding them > later.
I am would be happy to give it a try, but I think we need to fix couple of things to truly follow the semantics. As you have already noticed, attributes conflicts on different declarations are not reported. Also I found out that code like ``` void f21(void) __attribute__((ownership_returns(foo))); ``` does not cause an error. I will fill an issue for these cases. Also, thank you so much for review! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98941 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
