bcain added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D41368#959579, @smeenai wrote:
> @mclow.lists are you okay with this approach? I'm also fine using a cast to > silence the warning, as @zturner suggested, but we should suppress the > warning in some way, otherwise libc++ 6 is gonna have compile warnings with > clang 6 out of the box, which isn't great. > > A third alternative, which is the least invasive, though not complete in some > sense: we just add `-Wno-tautological-constant-compare` to the compile flags > for libc++ (in CMake), to suppress the warning during libc++'s compilation. > There's still an instance of the warning in a header, but all other clients > of the header should treat it as a system header (in which case warnings will > be suppressed anyway). It's not targeted at all and could suppress legitimate > instances of the warning though. I agree, if we're willing to disable the warning in libc++ builds we should be willing to disable it via pragma. Repository: rCXX libc++ https://reviews.llvm.org/D41368 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
