dexonsmith added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34574#791124, @ahatanak wrote:
> Duncan and I had a discussion on this. > > We are thinking about adding a warning that tells users that aligned > allocation /deallocation operators are being called but they are not defined > in the library. Likely, something like `-Werror=aligned-allocation-availability` (by default). > If the users haven't defined their own aligned allocation / deallocation > operators, they will get a link error if the deployment target is too old, > but the warning will tell them what the root cause of the error is. If they > have defined their own operators, they will get a false positive warning, but > it's still possible to turn it off by passing -faligned-allocation. Or by passing `-Wno-aligned-allocation-availability`. > Annotating the implicit declarations with availability will cause compile > time errors, so we can't do so if we just want to issue a warning. > > Richard, what do you think? I also wonder: should we add a warning for such code in pre-C++17? https://reviews.llvm.org/D34574 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
