On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Roman Lebedev via Phabricator via cfe-commits <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > lebedev.ri added a comment. > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629#865068, @lebedev.ri wrote: > >> And finish reducing the code by for-range-loop`ing over array + use >> `std::array`. > > > I will need to fix handling of the second edge-case (comparison with max > unsigned value or with min/max for signed values), so having the code this > way *might* help.. Allright, now that weekend has passed, does anyone has any concerns with this, or can this be committed? To reiterate, there are two things in here: 1. adding a new more fine-grained -Wtautological-unsigned-enum-zero-compare, and using it instead of -Wtautological-unsigned-zero-compare for enums 2. small code refactoring to minimize the code duplication that is created by the first step.
> Repository: > rL LLVM > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629 Roman. > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
