On 19 January 2017 at 13:16, Aaron Ballman <aaron.ball...@gmail.com> wrote: > I wasn't thinking about that kind of odr-unuse when reviewing your > patch, so I am starting to think that perhaps it's not worth > distinguishing unevaluated contexts or not in the diagnostic. :-( If > we could do it, then great (we seem to be able to do it for regular > variable use: http://coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/4bde9b5daf48956a), > but if not, then I think we should just go back to the original > wording that says it's not required to be captured (in all cases, not > distinguishing odr-use) and put in a FIXME with the test cases that > could have an improved diagnostic (including the test case talked > about here, which we should add). What do you think?
The warning can distinguish: * not looked up * looked up * looked up and used It doesn't know why a variable was looked up but not used. You suggested the wording "not required to be captured for this use" earlier in this thread; is that better? -- Malcolm Parsons _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
