Re-fix r51907 in a way which doesn't affect valid code. This essentially

moves the check for the invalid construct to a point where it doesn't 
affect other uses of isIntegerConstantExpr, and we can warn properly 
when the extension is used.  This makes it a bit more complicated, but 
it's a lot cleaner.

Steve, please tell me if this check is sufficient to handle the 
relevant system header.  I know it's enough to handle the testcase, but 
I don't know what exactly the original looks like.

llvm-svn: 51918

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/clang/lib/AST/Expr.cpp b/clang/lib/AST/Expr.cpp
index a89fbd621a5..357d711978b 100644
--- a/clang/lib/AST/Expr.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/AST/Expr.cpp
@@ -918,11 +918,6 @@ bool Expr::isIntegerConstantExpr(llvm::APSInt &Result, ASTContext &Ctx,
     if (!SubExpr->getType()->isArithmeticType() ||
         !getType()->isIntegerType()) {
       if (Loc) *Loc = SubExpr->getLocStart();
-      // GCC accepts pointers as an extension.
-      // FIXME: check getLangOptions().NoExtensions. At the moment, it doesn't
-      // appear possible to get langOptions() from the Expr.
-      if (SubExpr->getType()->isPointerType()) // && !NoExtensions
-        return true;
       return false;
     }