On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Dario Domizioli <[email protected]>wrote:
> Hi Sean. > > > On 12 May 2014 19:36, Sean Silva <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +#pragma clang optimize on top of spaghetti // expected-warning {{extra >> tokens at end of '#pragma clang optimize' - ignored}} >> The diagnostic here is ambiguous. Was the pragma itself ignored or were >> the extra tokens ignored? >> >> > Hm... The whole pragma is ignored in that case. Some other pragmas behave > the same - if they are not correctly formatted and they have additional > argument they are ignored as a whole. Now that I think of it, I agree that > this behaviour is confusing. > I have maintained consistency with other pragmas (ahem... ok, maybe I have > copied the check from another pragma handler :-) ), but I could easily > change this specific case to an error. In fact, now I think it would make > more sense. > > As for the actual text being printed out, the problem is that I have > leveraged an existing warning message. I could change the message, but it > would suddenly become different in all the pragmas that make use of the > message. If we do that, it would probably be better to make it a separate, > documented change. > Yeah, that definitely would be better suited to being its own change. -- Sean Silva > > Cheers, > Dario Domizioli > SN Systems - Sony Computer Entertainment Group > > > >> PS: I actually laughed out loud when I read "on top of spaghetti" :) >> > > I cannot claim the paternity of the phrase since I copied it from another > pragma test. :-) But I found it funny too. > > > > > > > > >> >> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Dario Domizioli < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hello again! >>> >>> I have now extended the patch with support for serialization of the >>> state of the pragma (for PCHs). I have followed a similar pattern to the >>> one used for the floating point pragmas and the diagnostic pragmas. >>> I have added a PCH test that verifies that if a "#pragma clang optimize >>> off" is still active at the end of a PCH then a source file compiled >>> including the PCH will behave as if the pragma was specified in the source >>> (as it happens with normal headers). The test is modeled after the pragma >>> diagnostics test. >>> >>> I hope the new attached patch covers the issue that was raised by >>> Richard... but I welcome any feedback. I might have missed something. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Dario Domizioli >>> SN Systems - Sony Computer Entertainment Group >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 7 May 2014 18:41, Dario Domizioli <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks Aaron! >>>> >>>> Patch LGTM, modulo Richard's comments about serialization (I worried >>>>> about the same thing, and my preference is for the patch to be >>>>> all-inclusive when feasible, but Richard is welcome to weigh in). I >>>>> have no strong opinions on whether it should be one diagnostic or two. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I will wait for Richard's comments then; meanwhile I'll keep working on >>>> the serialization issue. >>>> >>>> As for the diagnostics, I think that having two might make it easier to >>>> extend the "unexpected" case if the pragma gains new functionality in the >>>> future, while the "missing" case is unlikely to change... although the >>>> %select is quite powerful so I haven't got a strong preference either. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Dario Domizioli >>>> SN Systems - Sony Computer Entertainment Group >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cfe-commits mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
