Hi,
Ok, its committed in r178632. I took out the additional check as requested
by Richard and merged in the test-case into test/Sema/static-assert.c, but
I retained the fact that the test runs also in C++ mode since there seemed
not to be any coverage given to the fact that _Static_assert can also be
used in C++ mode (as opposed to static_assert). If this remains a problem,
of course it can easily be remedied!
Thanks for your input.
Andy
On Thursday, March 28, 2013 10:22 AM, Andy Gibbs wrote:
On Wednesday, March 27, 2013 9:09 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
+ // Parse _Static_assert declaration.
+ if (Tok.is(tok::kw_static_assert) || Tok.is(tok::kw__Static_assert))
{
Any reason to check for _Static_assert here? This code is not reachable
in C++.
(I think you meant static_assert not _Static_assert!)
This is more in keeping with the fact that both are tested together
throughout the code even where the code is not reachable in C and I would
think it best to leave both in here also, just in case code paths change
in future (for whatever reason) and since the additional check is hardly
an expensive one.
On a separate point though, I'm not sure clang needs both
tok::kw_static_assert and tok::kw__Static_assert since they are always
paired together (except in one place). Is it important to keep them
separate, or could I merge them into one?
+++ clang/test/Sema/static-assert2.c
Please add the tests to test/Sema/static-assert.c instead. We don't need
to run these tests in C++ mode; we already have good coverage for C++11's
static_assert.
As you wish; I had split it out to show that the diagnostics and support
were the same in both C and C++ for the same code.
Let me know your thoughts on tok::kw__Static_assert above, and I'll commit
later today.
Cheers
Andy
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
