Douglas, Chandler, Please, take a look at the updated patch here: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D38
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Alexander Kornienko <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Douglas Gregor <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Sep 8, 2012, at 6:55 PM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Douglas Gregor <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Sep 7, 2012, at 6:44 PM, Alexander Kornienko <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Author: alexfh >>> > Date: Fri Sep 7 17:44:34 2012 >>> > New Revision: 163429 >>> > >>> > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=163429&view=rev >>> > Log: >>> > Fixed http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13777 >>> > >>> > Modified: >>> > cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp >>> > >>> > Modified: cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp >>> > URL: >>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp?rev=163429&r1=163428&r2=163429&view=diff >>> > >>> ============================================================================== >>> > --- cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp (original) >>> > +++ cfe/trunk/tools/clang-check/ClangCheck.cpp Fri Sep 7 17:44:34 2012 >>> > @@ -58,7 +58,9 @@ >>> > "ast-dump-filter", >>> > >>> cl::desc(Options->getOptionHelpText(options::OPT_ast_dump_filter))); >>> > >>> > -namespace { >>> > +// Anonymous namespace here causes problems with gcc <= 4.4 on MacOS: >>> > +// http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13777 >>> > +// namespace { >>> >>> How about just putting it in the clang namespace? At the very least, >>> please delete the commented-out lines. >>> >> >> Agreed on both fronts. Also, bugs are usually cited just as "PR13777", >> and almost never cited in the source code, but rather in the test case >> itself. >> >> >> The reasoning behind this is that the code and comments should stand >> alone. Nobody should have to hunt through a bug tracker to determine the >> intent. >> > Thanks for the explanation, I didn't know this point. > > >> The test suite, on the other hand, is a mix of feature tests and >> regression tests that often grows in response to specific bugs, and the >> cross-linking to those bugs is a valuable addition. >> > This is overall a reasonable statement. As for this specific case, I'm not > sure I can come up with a sane test for this (this is not a functionality > after all, and the bug is not in the source code, but in an external > compiler). That's why I decided to put a link to the bug tracker item in > the source file itself. And the second reason is that I wanted to provide > more context to those who'll read this code, in addition to the short > description immediately in comments. > > >> That said, is this really the necessary solution? There are a lot of >> template arguments defined in an anonymous namespace within the codebase >> already. How do they work without problems? >> >> >> Yes, this is odd. >> > I would suggest, that this can be the only place where a class from an > unnamed namespace is used as a parameter of a template function, which has > a local class. But I certainly don't want to find a complete and correct > proof of this statement. It could be rather time consuming, and I'm sure it > won't have much value. > > >> I feel like this is an ODR violation waiting to happen unless we put it >> in an anonymous namespace the way it should be... >> >> -Chandler >> >> > -- > Regards, > Alex > -- Alexander Kornienko | Software Engineer | [email protected] | +49 151 221 77 957 Google Germany GmbH | Dienerstr. 12 | 80331 München
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
