On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 5:04 PM, David Majnemer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 4:16 AM, David Majnemer > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Right now, the code base is correct in saying that many types, like >> void, are non-POD when passed in to va_arg. >> >> While it is true that "struct X" is not a POD type, we do not say why >> it is not a POD type. >> I think that it would be more clear to say that the type is >> incomplete, this had a side effect of making a bit more sense in C99 >> mode where non-POD is not really part of the lingo. >> >> The attached patch should make it a little more clear. It also moves a >> preexisting test to a more appropriate location. >> >> -- >> David Majnemer >> > > After talking some folks in #llvm and thinking about it a bit, I have > decided to implement the following: > > The type must be complete per RequireCompleteType, otherwise issue an > error diagnostic > The type must be non-abstract per RequireNonAbstractType, otherwise > issue an error diagnostic > The type must be a POD per isPODType, otherwise issue a warning > diagnostic (-Wnon-pod-varargs) > > I have attached the new patch > > -- > David Majnemer >
A small update to the patch: don't return ExprError when the Diag is just a warning and keep the formatting within 80 columns. I had someone look it over in #llvm, awaiting the OK over here. -- David Majnemer
va_arg_incomplete3.patch
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
