rsmith added a comment. In D61357#1485581 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D61357#1485581>, @dblaikie wrote:
> Oh, @rsmith - if there's any better/different testing (if you can figure out > how to reduce the test case down further, now that we know the cause - or if > you'd like testing for other codepaths I've touched in this patch) I'm all > ears. (also naming/API wrangling - my changes were just the minimal sort of > "this works" based on what we discussed, but totally happy to do more > involved/different things if there's such to be done) Perhaps we could add a diagnostic scope object of some kind, which would assert (or reorder the diagnostics?) if a diagnostic is produced while producing notes for a different diagnostic. That might help for new code and for places where we're aware -- or suspect -- there is a problem, but we don't know where the existing bugs are and that doesn't help us find them. :( Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61357/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61357 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
