This appears to be consistent with GCC's implementation of the same warning
under -Wparentheses. Suppressing a << b + c for cases where 'a' is a user
defined type for compatibility with C++ stream IO. Otherwise suggest
parentheses around the addition or subtraction subexpression.
(this came up when MSVC was complaining (incorrectly, so far as I can tell)
about a perceived violation of this within the LLVM codebase, PR14001)
llvm-svn: 165283
pretty. In particular this makes it much easier for me to read messages
such as:
x.cc:42: ?: has lower ...
Where I'm inclined to associate the third ':' with a missing column
number, but in fact column numbers have been turned off. Similar
punctuation collisions happened elsewhere as well.
llvm-svn: 133121
This is a follow-up to r132565, and should address the rest of PR9969:
Warn about cases such as
int foo(A a, bool b) {
return a + b ? 1 : 2; // user probably meant a + (b ? 1 : 2);
}
also when + is an overloaded operator call.
llvm-svn: 132784
Warn in cases such as "x + someCondition ? 42 : 0;",
where the condition expression looks arithmetic, and has
a right-hand side that looks boolean.
This (partly) addresses http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9969
llvm-svn: 132565
David Blaikie