forked from OSchip/llvm-project
PR51158: Don't emit -Wswitch or -Wcovered-switch-default for empty enums
An empty enum is used to implement C++'s new-ish "byte" type (to make sure it's a separate type for overloading, etc - compared to a typedef) - without any enumerators. Some clang warnings don't make sense in this sort of situation, so let's skip them for empty enums. It's arguable that possibly some situations of enumerations without enumerators might want the previous-to-this-patch behavior (if the enum is autogenerated and in some cases comes up empty, then maybe a default in an empty switch would still be considered problematic - so that when you add the first enumeration you do get a -Wswitch warning). But I think that's niche enough & this std::byte case is mainstream enough that we should prioritize the latter over the former. If someone's got a middle ground proposal to account for both of those situations, I'm open to patches/suggestions/etc.
This commit is contained in:
parent
a806f933a2
commit
83225936af
|
@ -1461,7 +1461,8 @@ Sema::ActOnFinishSwitchStmt(SourceLocation SwitchLoc, Stmt *Switch,
|
|||
|
||||
// If switch has default case, then ignore it.
|
||||
if (!CaseListIsErroneous && !CaseListIsIncomplete && !HasConstantCond &&
|
||||
ET && ET->getDecl()->isCompleteDefinition()) {
|
||||
ET && ET->getDecl()->isCompleteDefinition() &&
|
||||
!empty(ET->getDecl()->enumerators())) {
|
||||
const EnumDecl *ED = ET->getDecl();
|
||||
EnumValsTy EnumVals;
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -130,3 +130,19 @@ void test(Opaque o, OpaqueClass oc, Defined d) {
|
|||
}
|
||||
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
namespace EmptyEnum {
|
||||
|
||||
enum Empty : int {};
|
||||
void test(Empty e) {
|
||||
switch (e) {
|
||||
case (Empty)0:
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
switch (e) {
|
||||
default:
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
} // namespace EmptyEnum
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue