elizabethandrews wrote: > > > I'm not sure that top-level type of a variable declaration is actually > > > any better than the 'must be object pointer or reference'? Maybe 'must be > > > pointer or reference', and let the function pointer check take care of > > > clarifying it? > > > > > > Do you mean `"'%0' attribute may only be applied to a pointer or reference"` > > that SEEMS more readable to me? If you wanted to be extra kind, you could > print the type you're applying it to in parens.
I prefer this as well. @tahonermann can I go ahead with this? I think a simpler diagnostic like this is more user-friendly. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/200849 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
