Ping
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> This goes beyond what GCC supports: there, the attribute must be given a >> simple identifier. I think this extension is reasonable, but please add a >> -Wgcc-compat warning for the cases that GCC doesn't allow. I also wonder >> whether there's any reason to restrict this to a DeclRefExpr, or whether we >> should just allow any expression of the right type. (If we make this more >> permissive, we'll need to document when the expression is evaluated) > > I've added another test file for ensuring we fire the -Wgcc-compat > warnings as expected. As for extending it to any expression of the > right type, that is a bit further than I was looking to take this (I > mostly wanted to get another case of unresolved identifiers out of the > way for other attribute work). > > Thanks! > > ~Aaron > >> >> On 4 Sep 2013 07:47, "Aaron Ballman" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The cleanup attribute was using an unresolved, simple identifier as >>> its sole argument. However, while processing the attribute, we would >>> attempt to look up the simple identifier, flag its usage, etc as >>> though it were a resolved identifier. This patch removes the custom >>> logic from SemaDeclAttr.cpp and simply uses a resolved identifier >>> (DeclRefExpr) for the argument. I've added some extra test cases >>> since this expands what can be used as an argument to cleanup. >>> >>> ~Aaron _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
