| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
VerifyDiagnosticConsumer, make the necessary adjustment to 580 test-cases which will henceforth require this new directive.
llvm-svn: 166280
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Rewording the diagnostic to be more precise/correct: "default label in switch
which covers all enumeration values" and changed the switch to
-Wcovered-switch-default
llvm-svn: 148783
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is for consistency, since the flag is actually under -Wswitch now, rather
than -Wswitch-enum (since it's really valuable for the former and rather
orthogonal to the latter)
llvm-svn: 148680
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This warning acts as the complement to the main -Wswitch-enum warning (which
warns whenever a switch over enum without a default doesn't cover all values of
the enum) & has been an an-doc coding convention in LLVM and Clang in my
experience. The purpose is to ensure there's never a "dead" default in a
switch-over-enum because this would hide future -Wswitch-enum errors.
The name warning has a separate flag name so it can be disabled but it's grouped
under -Wswitch-enum & is on-by-default because of this.
The existing violations of this rule in test cases have had the warning disabled
& I've added a specific test for the new behavior (many negative cases already
exist in the same test file - and none regressed - so I didn't add more).
Reviewed by Ted Kremenek ( http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20120116/051690.html )
llvm-svn: 148640
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 115356
|
|
|
a helper function (AdjustAPSInt) and use that
for adjusting the high bounds of case ranges
before APSInt comparisons. Fixes
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=8135
Some minor refacorings while I am here.
llvm-svn: 115355
|
