On Jul 17, 2019, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Sure, if it's worthwhile to you I think it's an improvement even
> if it doesn't fix a bug. (In full disclosure I'm not empowered
> to formally approve bigger patches but I think cleanups like this
> can safely be committed as obvious.)
Thanks, I'm install
On 7/17/19 1:14 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jul 17, 2019, Martin Sebor wrote:
Isn't this test sufficient to avoid the problems?
if (!k && kmax > 1)
continue;
It is, unless someone (i) doesn't realize attributes that are present in
the type can't be present
On Jul 17, 2019, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Isn't this test sufficient to avoid the problems?
> if (!k && kmax > 1)
> continue;
It is, unless someone (i) doesn't realize attributes that are present in
the type can't be present in the decl, (ii) misreads the '!k' as just
'k'
On 7/17/19 12:02 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Hello, Martin,
The initial patch for PR 81824 fixed one of the possibilities of
-Wmissing-attributes reporting duplicates, namely, if TMPL had an
attribute in ATTRLIST that was missing from DECL's decl and type
attribute lists, both being non-empty.
A
