On 14/01/2014 22:57, Alp Toker wrote:
On 14/01/2014 22:05, Richard Smith wrote:
Well:
1) the context is an "incompatible with C++98" diagnostic
2) we really don't need to worry about theoretical future C17 or
OpenMP constructs now; we can easily change our diagnostics if we
ever support those things
Sorry, I didn't mention -- the diag clarification change was split out
from the C11 attributes extension I'd promised to help Renato with for
his 'vectorize' attribute.
Patch posted to cfe-commits, thread "[PATCH] Generalized attribute support"
Alp.
Having split this part out as an unrelated change may have
inadvertently lost some of the context as to why it was useful :-)
3) we have the '[[' in the snippet
4) a %select is *better* than a single fixed string if it makes the
diagnostic clearer
I'm fine with "'[[...]]' attributes" or similar, although it seems a
little redundant given (3). "C++ attributes" or "C++11 attributes"
work for me.
"C++11 attributes" works in this scenario if you want to go ahead and
change it, but let's keep options open to go back on that, because it
looks a little silly alongside the C11 version:
|def ext_cxx11_attribute_in_c : ExtWarn<||
|| "generalized attributes are a non-standard C extension">,
InGroup<CXXAttributes>;|
I'll throw up the full patch in a bit.
Alp.
--
http://www.nuanti.com
the browser experts
--
http://www.nuanti.com
the browser experts
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
