I couldn't find a case where both gcc and clang agreed at the same time that they should emit this warning, but I think that's just bugs in the way we detect these cases. From the near-identical warning message I would say they both should emit warnings for the same cases (and probably will in the future).
2017-06-21 19:41 GMT+02:00 Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk>: > Does the GCC warning warn on the same cases? > > On 21 Jun 2017 10:24 am, "Akira Hatanaka via Phabricator" > <revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> ahatanak added a comment. >> >> I didn't know gcc had its own option. This change seems reasonable to me. >> >> Since c++1z-compat-mangling was added just a few days ago, should we just >> rename it instead of adding an alias? >> >> >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D34439 >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
