On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Dimitry Andric <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jun 27, 2013, at 01:16, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> Author: rsmith >> Date: Wed Jun 26 18:16:51 2013 >> New Revision: 185035 >> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=185035&view=rev >> Log: >> PR16467: Teach -Wunsequenced that in C11 (unlike C++11), an assignment's >> side-effect is not sequenced before its value computation. Also fix a >> mishandling of ?: expressions where the condition is constant that was >> exposed by the tests for this. > > > Hi Richard, > > After this commit, the -Wunsequenced warning seems to have gotten a little > too aggressive. It now also warns about the following (admittedly silly) > construction: > > char *foo(char *p); > > void bar(char *p) > { > p = foo(++p); > } > > // unseq.c:5:11: warning: multiple unsequenced modifications to 'p' > [-Wunsequenced] > // p = foo(++p); > // ~ ^ > > Since a function call is a sequence point, the warning is not warranted in > its current form. > > Shall I re-open PR16467, or create a new PR?
Neither, I fixed this in r185282. Thanks for reporting it! _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
