I don't mind either way. This change seems beneficial on its own. On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 5:31 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sep 26, 2014 8:57 AM, "Renato Golin" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 16 September 2014 17:22, Daniel Jasper <[email protected]> wrote: > > > + // For backward compatibility: > > > + CHECK_PARSE("DerivePointerBinding: true", DerivePointerAlignment, > true); > > > + CHECK_PARSE("DerivePointerBinding: false", DerivePointerAlignment, > false); > > > > Hi Daniel, > > > > GCC 4.9.1 gives me this warning for that last line: > > > > src/llvm/tools/clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:8387:1132: > > warning: converting ‘false’ to pointer type for argument 1 of ‘char > > testing::internal::IsNullLiteralHelper(testing::internal::Secret*)’ > > [-Wconversion-null] > > CHECK_PARSE("DerivePointerBinding: false", DerivePointerAlignment, > false); > > I think we did something smart to suppress clangs warning in this common & > benign gunit test case. (Its just trying to teat if something /could/ be a > null pointer literal so it doesn't lose that down through some template > layers) > > Should we just disable gccs version of the warning? > > > > > cheers, > > --renato > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cfe-commits mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
