fahadnayyar marked 2 inline comments as done. fahadnayyar added a comment. In D139114#4023456 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D139114#4023456>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> It looks like this change breaks libc++ (see the precommit CI failures) by > making more changes than expected. I'm now seeing `implicit conversion > changes signedness` diagnostics where we didn't previously get them. Is that > expected and intentional? (I think it may be a fix: > https://godbolt.org/z/hTaaf8c5P so I'm adding the libc++ folks just in case > they disagree.) > > Also, these changes should come with an entry in the release notes. I've made some change to suppress the warning in libcxx, please have a look and let me know if the change can break the semantics of the function in any way. Since gcc also give warning on this example, I guess we should include this behaviour in clang as well. ================ Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:13400-13401 + // Check for implicit conversion loss of precision form 64-to-32 for compound + // statements. + if (E->getLHS()->getType()->isIntegerType() && ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > This comment isn't quite accurate, right? It's checking for any kind of > implicit conversion issue (such as changing signs even if the integer widths > stay the same). Changed the comment! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D139114/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D139114 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
