On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Ivan Krasin <[email protected]> wrote: > Eli, > I have updated the patch. Now I use language-extension-token parameter to > suppress the warning "extension used". > Is it fine now? Alternatively, I can introduce more fine-grained warning > asm-token with higher priority than ext_token_used. > So far, ext_token_used complains about the following tokens (see > lib/Basic/IdentifierTable.cpp): > > else if (LangOpts.GNUKeywords && (Flags & KEYGNU)) AddResult = 1; > else if (LangOpts.MicrosoftExt && (Flags & KEYMS)) AddResult = 1; > else if (LangOpts.Borland && (Flags & KEYBORLAND)) AddResult = 1; > So, it's GNU, Microsoft and Borland extensions.
-Wlanguage-extension-token is fine. -Eli > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Ivan Krasin <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 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
