dblaikie added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp:3117 + llvm::APSInt Value = Enum->getInitVal(); + Value.setIsSigned(IsSigned); + Enumerators.push_back(DBuilder.createEnumerator(Enum->getName(), Value)); ---------------- rnk wrote: > dblaikie wrote: > > Is the value already signed appropriately? > > > > Removing this line of code (and the `bool IsSigned` variable, so it doesn't > > break `-Werror=unused-variable`) doesn't cause any tests to fail, that I > > can see. > I'm afraid it might not be NFC. I took the cautious approach of trying to > leave things exactly as they were. Enums in C can have surprisingly different > behavior, IIRC. I'd rather not leave in haunted-graveyard-y code like that. Could we assert that Value.getIsSigned == IsSigned? Then if there's a case where it isn't we'll have a test case/justification for the code? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D106585/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D106585 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
