On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 05:44:00PM -0700, John McCall wrote: > > I'm sorry, I missed your early request, and your response to my review. > > I'm much more likely to respond quickly if you keep me as a recipient. > > > > I really would like you to diagnose this in Sema, please. > Target-specific > > restrictions are not new, especially on builtin functions. But if you do > > that, it's approved for merge. > > But Sema is too early, it breaks valid use cases that are never going to > hit the backend at all. Consider clang --analyze or clang-modernize. > Especially the latter is completely target independent, so it shouldn't > get fail on code that is valid on one platform and only fails on another > because of LLVM bugs. > It's target-independent except for the thousands of ways that C code is not target-independent. Headers need to be in place and provide the right declarations, hordes of warnings turn out differently based on type size, printf format checking has target-specific logic, etc. The way we (don't) implement them, __builtin_setjmp and __builtin_longjmp are target-specific builtin functions, and they should be diagnosed along with the rest of them. John.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
