On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > def ext_integer_too_large_for_signed : ExtWarn< > - "integer constant is larger than the largest %0-bit signed integer > type">, > - InGroup<DiagGroup<"implicitly-unsigned-literal">>; > + "integer constant evaluates to value %0 that cannot be represented as a " > + "%1-bit signed integer">, > InGroup<DiagGroup<"implicitly-unsigned-literal">>; > > This should probably go on to say that we're interpreting the value as > unsigned. > > I also think we should have separate diagnostics for the case where we > evaluate a constant expression (which should include the 'evaluates to value > %0' part) and the case where it's a literal (where we shouldn't). We don't > need to repeat things that are literally present in the source code. (Sorry > for suggesting the unconditional change here, I hadn't really looked at the > use cases other than the one in SemaDeclAttr.cpp)
No problem! I can make those changes easily. ~Aaron _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
