like, in my particular case, this warning complains about asm directive, which is not a part of ANSI C (-pedantic)
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Ivan Krasin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Eli Friedman <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Ivan Krasin <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi llvm team! >> > >> > This patch adds support of -Wno-extension-used to make it possible to >> > suppress the warning: >> > >> > lala.c:1:21: warning: extension used [-pedantic] >> > double lala(double) asm("llvm.log.f64"); >> > >> > r140770 has started to promote this warning to error if -Werror is >> > specified (which is absolutely correct). >> > We have a test that checks some llvm intrinsics and it's not Clangy to >> > drop -Werror just because one particular warning is expected. >> > I have added the option to suppress this warning and has removed it >> > from the test for warnings w/o suppression options. >> > >> > OK to commit? >> >> We really ought to clarify what exactly this is warning about and name >> the warning group in a more intuitive way. -Wno-extension-used >> doesn't give the user any idea what warning it is actually >> suppressing. I'm drawing a blank as to what exactly to call it, >> though. >> > Hi Eli, > > It suppresses any language extension used in the program source. I have no > preference on how the flag should be named and I have chosen > "extension-used" just to fit to the existing warning message: > "warning: extension used [-pedantic]" > > Probably, a better name would be language-extension or > language-extension-used. In this case -Wno-language-extension would give a > good idea of what warning does it suppress. > Are you fine with any of the options above? Do you have a better idea? > > >> -Eli >> > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
