================
@@ -2313,10 +2313,8 @@ StmtResult Parser::ParseBreakOrContinueStatement(bool
IsContinue) {
// TODO: Make this a compatibility/extension warning instead once the
// syntax of this feature is finalised.
Diag(LabelLoc, diag::err_c2y_labeled_break_continue) << IsContinue;
- if (!Target) {
+ if (!Target)
Diag(LabelLoc, diag::err_break_continue_label_not_found) << IsContinue;
- return StmtError();
----------------
AaronBallman wrote:
`CFG::buildCFG()` has no checks that anything is valid; I was thinking the
check was based on whether there was an invalid bit set somewhere, but that's
not the case for constructing the CFG. Instead,
`AnalysisBasedWarnings::IssueWarnings()` looks for whether there's been any
compilation errors before deciding whether to construct the CFG. So this change
"works" for anyone holding the CFG that way, but anyone with custom CFG use
will get odd behavior. (I didn't check how the static analyzer uses it, how
clang-tidy uses it, there's plugins to consider as well.)
> I feel like the main issue here is the fact that we’re trying to
> constant-evaluate a function that contains an error... which is a bit
> questionable imo.
+1, I would expect us to fail early rather than try to continue compilation in
this case.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/168332
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
