On Jan 9, 2013, at 8:01 AM, Rafael Espíndola <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> + NamedDecl *ND = dyn_cast<NamedDecl>(D);
>>> + if (!ND) {
>>> + S.Diag(Attr.getLoc(), diag::warn_attribute_ignored) << Attr.getName();
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>
>> Rafael,
>>
>> I'm concerned by attribute abuse. We just warn on too many weird
>> cases instead of throwing an error. I can understand "legacy code"
>> reasons, but this particular case never compiled, so there's no reason
>> to be forgiving.
>>
>> Maybe I am misunderstanding something...
>
> I would be more than happy to make this an error, but
>
> * We are very forgiving with the availability attribute for some
> reason. We warn if it is declared to be available after 10.5 and 10.7
> for example.
> * This is used mostly (only?) by apple, so I it is probably best if
> they decide whether this should be an error or warning.
Unfortunately, we're forced into making this a warning for historical reasons.
On Darwin, there are a pile of availability macros (eg, in <Availability.h>)
that currently expand to unavailable or deprecated attributes. Those macros
should switch to use the availability attribute, but that means we can't be too
strict or we break existing code.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
