================ @@ -179,6 +179,8 @@ def err_opencl_unknown_type_specifier : Error< def warn_unknown_attribute_ignored : Warning< "unknown attribute %0 ignored">, InGroup<UnknownAttributes>; +def ext_unknown_attribute_ignored : Extension< + "unknown attribute %0 ignored">, InGroup<UnknownAttributes>; ---------------- erichkeane wrote:
> From my understanding of the issue, an _unknown_ attr scope shouldn't result > in a warning by default. It should only be handled when a specific flag is > enabled or in pedantic mode. For that reason, I added an extension warning., > or is this not applicable in this case? That is not my understanding. For example, we'd want to warn/identify someone typing `gcc` instead of `gnu`, or `calng` instead of `clang`, the same way we want to identify `nodiscard` vs `no_discard`. Did you see a discussion about this somewhere else? I'd be curious to see what @AaronBallman has to say about this when he returns from his break. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/120925 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
