================
@@ -4248,6 +4248,22 @@ bool CompilerInvocation::ParseLangArgs(LangOptions
&Opts, ArgList &Args,
Diags.Report(diag::err_drv_invalid_value) << A->getAsString(Args) << Val;
}
+ if (auto *A = Args.getLastArg(OPT_fsanitize_overflow_pattern_exclusion_EQ)) {
+ for (int i = 0, n = A->getNumValues(); i != n; ++i) {
+ StringRef Value = A->getValue(i);
+ if (Value == "none")
+ Opts.OverflowPatternExclusionMask |= LangOptionsBase::None;
----------------
bwendling wrote:
This seems counter-intuitive. Shouldn't this be an assignment instead?
```c
Opts.OverflowPatternExclusionMask = LangOptionsBase::None;
```
Or is that not the behavior you want?
Also, look up `StringSwitch`, which does the same as these if-then statements,
but in the LLVM way. :-)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100272
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
