On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Hans Wennborg <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Hans Wennborg <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The attached patch makes the warnings about uninitialized fields >> include the field name. This makes the wording more informative, and >> more consistent with the other uninitialized warnings.
Looks reasonable (though is there a particular use case where the caret diagnostics don't indicate the right variable, etc? that makes having the name in the diagnostic particularly useful?) >> I'm not sure if we really need to do the LookupResult thing here; I >> copy-pasted it from SemaDecl.cpp:6329. It would be great if someone >> could comment on that. So far as I can tell this doesn't appear to be necessary in either case. Using DRE->getNameInfo().getName() directly in the SemaDecl.cpp:6329 situation doesn't regress any tests. I'd be inclined to change it there & use the same technique for your patch. At least that way if someone figures out why it was necessary, they'll ought to be able to add a test. (consider this sign off, if you like - if you want a more informed opinion on the LookupResult issue, you could wait for that) - David _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
