rtrieu marked an inline comment as done. rtrieu added inline comments.
================ Comment at: test/Sema/parentheses.c:156 + + (void)(x ^ b ? 1 : 2); // no warning, ^ is often used as logical xor + (void)(x || b ? 1 : 2); // no warning, logical operator ---------------- jfb wrote: > rtrieu wrote: > > jfb wrote: > > > I don't understand why `^` is different. What do you mean by "often used > > > as a logical xor`? > > In C++, there's the bitwise operators |, &, and ^. And there's the logical > > operators || and &&. Since there's no ^^ for a logical-xor, many people > > will just use the bitwise-xor ^ instead. Since this isn't warning on > > logical operators, it makes sense to exclude the bitwise-xor that is often > > used as logical-xor. > So code is often buggy when it uses `|` and `&` as diagnosed by this patch, > but is rarely buggy when it uses `^`? That's correct. From my testing, &&, || and ^ all had low bug finding rates and didn't make sense to include into this warning while | and & had a high bug finding rate. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D66043/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D66043 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
