[Bug c++/105377] Likely a misleading clang warning -Wc++20-attribute-extensions

2022-04-25 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105377 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/105377] Likely a misleading clang warning -Wc++20-attribute-extensions

2022-04-25 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105377 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- But we don['t want to use gnu++17 because we want the compiler to be built using portable ISO C++17. An unrecognized attribute is a portable ISO C++17 construct, it just doesn't do anything (except maybe

[Bug c++/105377] Likely a misleading clang warning -Wc++20-attribute-extensions

2022-04-25 Thread egallager at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105377 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/105377] Likely a misleading clang warning -Wc++20-attribute-extensions

2022-04-25 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105377 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Yes, I'd prefer to keep it the way it is.

[Bug c++/105377] Likely a misleading clang warning -Wc++20-attribute-extensions

2022-04-25 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105377 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment