2012/2/16 Rafael Espíndola <[email protected]>: >> I don't think it's been finding false positives, actually. I think >> the real problem is that there's no way for the programmer to specify >> their intentions. > > One false positive was in a (strange, ABI dependent) code in firefox. > The javascript engine used to be C and still has a C interface. The > actual implementation is c++. The basic "javascript value" type is > declared as a C or C++ type with the same layout.
Can you give me an example of what that type looks like? > The code should probably be changed to use a C type on the interfaces > and have a implicitly constructed c++ type that wraps it, but that > would be a massive change to the codebase, so I had to disable this > warning for us too. Yeah, it's a bummer that the only way to suppress this is to either disable the warning entirely, or to use a #pragma to do it on a case by case basis. There's no way to flag the declaration of the type as being fine for C linkage... ~Aaron _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
