rjmccall added a comment. In D72231#1881760 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72231#1881760>, @nickdesaulniers wrote:
> In D72231#1879347 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72231#1879347>, @rjmccall wrote: > > > In D72231#1878528 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72231#1878528>, @nathanchance > > wrote: > > > > > There appear to a be semantic difference between GCC and clang with the > > > current version of this patch which results in a lot of additional > > > warnings in the Linux kernel: https://godbolt.org/z/eHFJd8 > > > > > > Warning about casting to an enum seems clearly correct and in scope for > > this warning. Warning about casting to `_Bool` seems clearly incorrect and > > should not be warned about at all. > > > Maybe we should only warn if the size of the `void*` is smaller than the size > of the `enum`? (32b `void*`, 64b `enum`)? https://godbolt.org/z/oAts-u > > Otherwise this warning creates a massive mess for us to clean up, and I > suspect Linux kernel developers will just end up disabling the warning. If deployment is easier if we split out a subgroup that we can turn off, that seems fine. But I don't see any good abstract justification for warning about a cast to `int` and not a cast to an `int`-sized `enum`. What would the reasoning be, just that the latter "couldn't possibly" be intended to preserve the original pointer value, so it must be an opaque value being represented as a `void*`? That seems pretty weak to me. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D72231/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D72231 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
