lebedev.ri added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45163#1056044, @rjmccall wrote:
> It seems reasonable to ask libc++ to use > `__attribute__((warn_unused_result))` if `[[nodiscard]]` is unavailable. https://reviews.llvm.org/D45179 should hopefully add an **opt-in** define to allow doing just that. But it will then have to be enabled in the LLVM buildsystem. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45163#1056074, @Quuxplusone wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45163#1055957, @lebedev.ri wrote: > > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45163#1055856, @rjmccall wrote: > > > > > Well, we should feel welcome to submit patches to the C++ library > > > implementations, I think. I can understand why Marshall is waiting to > > > just do this until he gets a comprehensive committee paper, but he might > > > consider taking a patch in the meantime. > > > > > > That has been discussed, and it's not going to happen. Ask him if you want > > more info. > > > You say a library patch is not going to happen, but isn't that library patch > literally https://reviews.llvm.org/D45179, which has been accepted (although > I just left a comment explaining why the current macro-soup is suboptimal)? We may be talking about different things here. I'm simply pointing out that libc++ will not be adding `nodiscard` attribute to functions unless it is mandated by the standard, and that it *has* to be opt-in for earlier standards. I'm not saying that just to argue, i'm literally retranslating what @mclow.lists has said, it's his words. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D45163 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
