It doesn't make sense to me to add a "sanitizer" that controls how another sanitizer reports failures; that is not how the `-fsanitize=` flags are supposed to work at all.
I think you should follow the existing model for frontend sanitizers here: if `-fsanitize-undefined-trap-on-error` is specified, then trap, otherwise produce a diagnostic. If it really makes sense to have a per-sanitizer trap-on-error mode (as opposed to the existing per-sanitizer `-fsanitize-recover=` setting), we should enable that for all the frontend sanitizers, not just this one, but it seems (perhaps naively) to me like `-fsanitize-recover=` should be sufficient here already? http://reviews.llvm.org/D10268 EMAIL PREFERENCES http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
