compnerd marked 11 inline comments as done. compnerd added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:3977 +// Swift attributes. +def warn_attr_swift_name_function ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > I want to make sure we're clear with the terminology used in the diagnostics, > so there's a fair number of "take -> have" suggestions here, but I want to be > sure I'm correct before you apply those suggestions. > > I'm used to function declarations having parameters which take arguments from > a function call expression. Are the diagnostics about "taking a parameter" > talking about "having a parameter" or about "taking an argument"? I believe > the string arguments are function signatures rather than function names > (perhaps?) and so we should be talking about having a parameter, but I wasn't > 100% sure. Discussed offline. ================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:3997 +def warn_attr_swift_name_setter_parameters + : Warning<"%0 attribute for setter must take one parameter for new value">, + InGroup<SwiftNameAttribute>; ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > take -> have > > elsewhere `new value` is spelled `'newValue:`, should that be the same here? `newValue:` is the argument label spelling and "new value" is the argument value, which is the reason for the difference. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87534/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87534 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
