On Nov 17, 2010, at 5:54 PM, Argyrios Kyrtzidis wrote:
> On Nov 17, 2010, at 3:51 PM, Argyrios Kyrtzidis wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>>> + if (ReturnTy->isPODType() &&
>>>> + Diags.getDiagnosticLevel(diag::warn_return_value_size) !=
>>>> + Diagnostic::Ignored) {
>>>
>>> Is this worth doing a 'is disabled' check for it? It doesn't seem that
>>> expensive. Does it cause a lot of PCH deserialization or something?
>>
>> This is to allow disabling the warning through #pragma diagnostic.
>
> Oops, disregard the above comment, I don't know what I was thinking.
>
> ASTContext::getTypeInfo will calculate a ASTRecordLayout if one is not
> available.
> It's debatable whether we will avoid it but better be on the safe side ?
When does this warning trigger? IMO, it would make sense to only do it on
function definitions, not prototypes (because if you just have a proto, you
probably don't have the option to change it, and that way you don't get the
warning in every translation unit).
If it just triggers on definitions, the layout will have to be computed at
codegen time, so it shouldn't add any cost to -O0 compiles.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
