zmodem wrote: > Note that recently Clang introduced a mechanism for file-level suppression of > warnings, for easier rollout of warnings: https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UsersManual.html#controlling-diagnostics-via-suppression-mappings > Would that serve the same purpose?
Well, that allows us to be gradual over a _set of files_. However, it doesn't help adapting the _set of warnings_ gradually. In this case, we already have `-Wnontrivial-memaccess` enabled. We don't want to have to disable it due to it gaining new warnings. I don't know if it's written down anywhere, but it's been Clang's practice to add new flags for new warnings. The system with groups and subgroups of warnings makes that work nicely. > Would you be ok with a flag, say `-Wnontrivial-memcpy`ΒΈ(any suggestion on > another name ?) implied by `-Wall` but that we could disable with > `-Wno-nontrivial-memcpy` ? The new flag should still be implied by `-Wnontrivial-memaccess` (which I assume is implied by `-Wall`). I like `-Wnontrivial-memcpy`. I suppose it also applies to `memove`, `memset`, etc. but maybe `-Wnontrivial-memcpy` is still the best name? (or `-Wnontrivial-mem-libcall`?) https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111434 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
