higher-performance wrote:
I'm surprised to hear this. It absolutely looks like a bug to me -- the
`deprecated` attribute applies to the symbol(s) being declared (`f` in that
example), not to everything inside that declaration, and especially not to
symbols used inside attributes in the declaration. They are completely
orthogonal. For example, if we have
```
int foo();
template<class T>
__attribute__((deprecated)) decltype(foo()) bar();
```
then you wouldn't say `foo` is deprecated, right? Or if we have
```
namespace ns {
int foo(const void*);
struct S {
__attribute__((deprecated))
friend char foo(S*);
};
template<class T>
__attribute__((deprecated))
auto bar(T& x) -> decltype(foo(&x));
}
int main() {
ns::S s;
ns::bar(s);
}
```
then surely users should observe a difference between `foo` being deprecated
vs. not-deprecated?
I also don't understand the motivation: what is the logic for _not_ telling
users a symbol that they're using is deprecated? How are they supposed to
migrate off the symbol if they don't know it's deprecated...?
P.S., there is apparently also an inconsistency here where removing `namespace
{ }` actually *does* cause this to fire! So even the intended behavior seems to
have a bug in its implementation, though I'm arguing the intended behavior
itself is buggy.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/222094
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
