================ @@ -1641,6 +1641,17 @@ def warn_implicitly_retains_self : Warning < "block implicitly retains 'self'; explicitly mention 'self' to indicate " "this is intended behavior">, InGroup<DiagGroup<"implicit-retain-self">>, DefaultIgnore; +def warn_blocks_capturing_this : Warning<"block implicitly captures 'this'">, + InGroup<DiagGroup<"blocks-capturing-this">>, + DefaultIgnore; +def warn_blocks_capturing_reference + : Warning<"block implicitly captures a C++ reference">, + InGroup<DiagGroup<"blocks-capturing-reference">>, + DefaultIgnore; +def warn_blocks_capturing_raw_pointer + : Warning<"block implicitly captures a raw pointer">, ---------------- sdefresne wrote:
Okay. I'll investigate defining and using a new attributes. Do you think this should be an attributes on the captured variables e.g. `__attribute__((capturable)) void* userData` or on the block e.g. `__attribute__((can_capture_pointers)) auto dispose = ^{ ... };` or both? On one hand an attribute on the variable would make it difficult to silence the warnings about capturing `this` (since `this` is implicitly available, it is not easy to mark it with the attribute), and would probably require defining a local variable `_this` and mark it with the attribute. On the other hand an attribute on the block would probably make it too easy to silence all the warnings. Finally, I have a question about process. Should I summarize all the discussion in the issue #143924? Should I write a formal design document for the warning or is the github issue enough? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144388 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits