echuraev added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D31183#710202, @Anastasia wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D31183#709566, @echuraev wrote: > > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D31183#708833, @yaxunl wrote: > > > > > I think this is a good feature for the convenience of user. I've seen > > > usage like this. > > > > > > I agree. I don't see any reasons why this case doesn't have the right to > > exist. I don't think that using extra parenthesis is a good solution for > > solving this problem. > > > I am just saying that I don't see a big use case for this. I am guessing it > can largely come from the macro expansions, but those are generally good > style to parenthesize. Ok. But in current implementation if I forget to parenthesize the defined expression (as in the test) I will get the following message: "error: member reference base type 'int' is not a structure or union". I don't think that the message is clear to understand that you just forgot to add parenthesis. So, should we change the diagnostic message to do it more understandable or push this patch because it can be more convenience for users? https://reviews.llvm.org/D31183 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
