CarlosAlbertoEnciso added inline comments.
================
Comment at: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:139
+ used in conjunction with ``-Werror`` and as a result, the new warnings
+ are turned into new errors.
+
----------------
thakis wrote:
> nit: I'd omit this paragraph -- this is true for all warnings and not special
> for this warning.
Removed that specific paragraph.
================
Comment at: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td:828-829
// -Wunused-local-typedefs = -Wunused-local-typedef
+def : DiagGroup<"unused-usings", [UnusedUsing]>;
+ // -Wunused-usings = -Wunused-using
----------------
thakis wrote:
> CarlosAlbertoEnciso wrote:
> > lebedev.ri wrote:
> > > Why? gcc compatibility?
> > No particular reason. I just follow the 'unused-local-typedefs' model.
> > If there is not objection from others reviewers, I will drop the gcc
> > compatibility.
> Does gcc have a `-Wunused-usings`? As far as I can tell it doesn't, so I
> agree not having the alias makes sense. -Wunused-local-typedefs is here
> because gcc has that flag.
As far as I can see, GCC does not have the ``-Wunused-usings`` alias.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44826
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
