On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > > > ================ > Comment at: lib/Lex/UnicodeCharSets.h:80-85 > @@ +79,8 @@ > + > +///// Returns true if the Unicode code point \p C is within the set of > +///// characters specified by \p CharSet. > +//template <size_t N> > +//static inline bool isCharInSet(uint32_t C, const UnicodeCharRange > (&Ranges)[N]){ > +// return isCharInSet(C, llvm::makeArrayRef(Ranges)); > +//} > + > ---------------- > Oops. This will not appear in the final patch. > > ================ > Comment at: lib/Lex/Lexer.cpp:2797-2803 > @@ +2796,9 @@ > + DiagnosticsEngine &Diags = PP->getDiagnostics(); > + DiagnosticsEngine::Level CompatLevel = > + Diags.getDiagnosticLevel(diag::warn_cxx11_ucn_escape_surrogate, > + getSourceLocation()); > + if (CompatLevel > DiagnosticsEngine::Ignored) > + Diag(BufferPtr, diag::warn_cxx11_ucn_escape_surrogate); > + else > + Diag(BufferPtr, diag::warn_ucn_escape_surrogate); > + } > ---------------- > Richard Smith wrote: >> This is a bit weird. What if warn_ucn_escape_surrogate is an error but >> warn_cxx11_ucn_escape_surrogate is just a warning? Perhaps have just one >> warning, but put it in both CXX11Compat and Unicode groups? > I'm still wondering what the best thing to do here is. I was worried about > "-Wunicode -Wno-c++11-compat" vs "-Wno-c++11-compat -Wunicode".
If we only want to keep one of these flags, I'd prefer we chose -Wunicode. -Wc++11-compat already misses a whole bunch of things, and I think we'd still want this warning enabled even in the case of -Wno-c++11-compat. _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
