Thanks, r141268. On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Eli Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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
