yicuixi wrote:

> I think emitting two diagnostics is fine (one for the underlying type and one 
> for the empty enum) because they are separate extensions. But I think it's a 
> bit odd that we claim the underlying type is a Microsoft extension rather 
> than a C23 extension -- that seems to be a preexisting issue which could be 
> handled in a separate PR: https://godbolt.org/z/sMhGoE3qq

SGTM, I'd prefer to fix that in a separate patch.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/159981
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to