================ @@ -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:
Curiously, and after I sent that, I realized why _WE_ of all compilers SHOULD warn here, even if others don't. Clang supports/recognizes the prefixes of all of the major compilers, which drastically increases the chance that an unrecognized one is a typo rather than an intentional difference. It would be justifiable to have a 'list' of ones that we don't recognize, but acknowledge that is hidden under that extension warning, but we SHOULD be doing `gcc` and `gmu` and `clagn` the same severity/applicability as if you misspelled it as `caries_dependency`. 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
