sgilles added a comment.
Sure, if it still applies. I'm just a user and have no write access. Looks
like I patched this locally and then forgot all about it.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D28148
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
h
sgilles marked an inline comment as done.
sgilles added a comment.
Ping - if there are no comments, could this be accepted?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D28148
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman
sgilles marked an inline comment as done.
sgilles added a comment.
Thanks to danielmarjamaki and rsmith for comments, which I think this diff
addresses. I have not done an extensive search of the codebase for places
where `isSyntacticForm()` would be useful, but there don't seem to be any
call
sgilles updated this revision to Diff 82849.
sgilles marked 2 inline comments as done.
sgilles added a comment.
Address danielmarjamaki's and rsmith's comments (creating
`InitListExpr::isSyntactic()` since it didn't already exist), as well as
correct syntax of test so that it actually runs.
ht
sgilles updated this revision to Diff 82720.
sgilles added a comment.
Address rsmith's comments, in particular: factor out testing zero initializers
to a method of `InitListExpr`; use `ParentIList` instead of
`StructuredSubobjectInitList`.
The warning is (still) not relaxed for C++ code. I hav
sgilles added a comment.
Thank you for the comments, rsmith. I'm addressing them now, and I'll make
sure to add your examples to the test case. I don't think `isSyntactic()`
exists, so I'm using `!getSyntactic()` instead, which should have the desired
effect.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D281
sgilles updated the summary for this revision.
sgilles updated this revision to Diff 82638.
sgilles added a comment.
Instead of adding a language option to distinguish C, negatively check
against C++.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D28148
Files:
lib/Sema/SemaInit.cpp
test/Sema/zero-initializer.c
sgilles added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D28148#632002, @rsmith wrote:
> Why are you adding a language option for this? Just use `!LangOpts.CPlusPlus`.
I didn't want to have this change accidentally apply to other, non-C++
languages, since I'm not sure which languages would go thro
sgilles created this revision.
sgilles added reviewers: cfe-commits, rsmith, zaks.anna.
Add ZeroInitializer as a language option, attached to all standards of
C. Relax checks for -Wmissing-field-initializers and -Wmissing-braces so
that, for such languages, assigning to a structure with { 0 } prod
