SemaChecking.cpp:3989 currently returns early from checking implicit conversions after it tests some specific X-to-boolean cases (including string and funciton literals) but before checking various other cases later on like NULL-to-X and wide integer literal to narrow integer.
This change removes the early return, fixes the diagnostic (to
correctly emit the fact that non-zero literals produce a "true"
boolean value rather than simply truncating the larger integer
literal), and updates the tests. In some cases the test cases were
fixed or updated (//expected-warning), in others I simply suppressed
the diagnostic because there adding the expected-warnings would've
added a lot of noise to the test cases*.
* This last case is a little bit questionable: in one specific case we
produce a really good diagnostic about constant integer literals used
in boolean contexts:
int f1();
bool f2() {
return f1() && 42;
}
we produce:
conv.cpp:3:15: warning: use of logical '&&' with constant operand
[-Wconstant-logical-operand]
return f1() && 42;
^ ~~
conv.cpp:3:15: note: use '&' for a bitwise operation
return f1() && 42;
^~
&
conv.cpp:3:15: note: remove constant to silence this warning
return f1() && 42;
~^~~~~
But then with my patch we get an extra diagnostic after the above warning/notes:
conv.cpp:3:18: warning: implicit conversion from 'int' to 'bool'
changes value from 42 to true [-Wconstant-conversion]
return f1() && 42;
~~ ^~
which isn't great - since we already gave a much more specific
diagnosis of the problem in the first warning. If there's some nice
way that we could suppress the second one whenever the first one is
provided (unless the first one is only a warning and the second is
-Werror'd?) I'd be happy to implement that.
Another thing I noticed as I was exploring this. We have a warning for
float-literal-to-int such as:
conv.cpp:2:9: warning: implicit conversion turns literal
floating-point number into integer: 'double' to 'int'
[-Wliteral-conversion]
int i = 3.1415;
~ ^~~~~~
But this warning is off-by-default. Why is that? It's already
relatively conservative (allowing things like : "int i = 3.0" because
3.0 converts to an int without loss of precision) - though it's not a
DiagnoseRuntimeBehavior, which it could be changed to (to be
consistent with similar things for integers like "unsigned char c =
256").
Or is it really that common to deliberately use floating point
literals to initialize integer values?
foo-to-bool.diff
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
