On Aug 8, 2012, at 9:16 AM, Douglas Gregor wrote:
> In both cases, why do we restrict this warning to ivars of Objective-C 
> pointer type? Direct ivar access to an 'int' ivar is still direct access to 
> an ivar, when one should presumably go through a property or method.

Doug, it is pretty clear from the restrictions that the original design of this 
warning
was to tell users when they might be directly accessing an ivar in a way that
broke memory safety.  Your reviews have completely repurposed the warning flag
to instead warn about all places that could have been property accesses.  That
might be abstractly okay, but does it satisfy the intent of the feature request?

John.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to