Roman Lebedev c5417aafec [Sema] -Wtautological-constant-compare is too good. Cripple it.
Summary:
The diagnostic was mostly introduced in D38101 by me, as a reaction to wasting a lot of time, see [[ https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20171009/206427.html | mail ]].
However, the diagnostic is pretty dumb. While it works with no false-positives,
there are some questionable cases that are diagnosed when one would argue that they should not be.

The common complaint is that it diagnoses the comparisons between an `int` and
`long` when compiling for a 32-bit target as tautological, but not when
compiling for 64-bit targets. The underlying problem is obvious: data model.
In most cases, 64-bit target is `LP64` (`int` is 32-bit, `long` and pointer are
64-bit), and the 32-bit target is `ILP32` (`int`, `long`, and pointer are 32-bit).

I.e. the common pattern is: (pseudocode)
```
#include <limits>
#include <cstdint>
int main() {
  using T1 = long;
  using T2 = int;

  T1 r;
  if (r < std::numeric_limits<T2>::min()) {}
  if (r > std::numeric_limits<T2>::max()) {}
}
```
As an example, D39149 was trying to fix this diagnostic in libc++, and it was not well-received.

This *could* be "fixed", by changing the diagnostics logic to something like
`if the types of the values being compared are different, but are of the same size, then do diagnose`,
and i even attempted to do so in D39462, but as @rjmccall rightfully commented,
that implementation is incomplete to say the least.

So to stop causing trouble, and avoid contaminating upcoming release, lets do this workaround:
* move these three diags (`warn_unsigned_always_true_comparison`, `warn_unsigned_enum_always_true_comparison`, `warn_tautological_constant_compare`) into it's own `-Wtautological-constant-in-range-compare`
* Disable them by default
* Make them part of `-Wextra`
* Additionally, give `warn_tautological_constant_compare` it's own flag `-Wtautological-type-limit-compare`.
  I'm not happy about that name, but i can't come up with anything better.

This way all three of them can be enabled/disabled either altogether, or one-by-one.

Reviewers: aaron.ballman, rsmith, smeenai, rjmccall, rnk, mclow.lists, dim

Reviewed By: aaron.ballman, rsmith, dim

Subscribers: thakis, compnerd, mehdi_amini, dim, hans, cfe-commits, rjmccall

Tags: #clang

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41512

llvm-svn: 321691
2018-01-03 08:45:19 +00:00
..
2017-12-21 22:10:27 +00:00
2018-01-01 15:53:16 +00:00

//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
// C Language Family Front-end
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//

Welcome to Clang.  This is a compiler front-end for the C family of languages
(C, C++, Objective-C, and Objective-C++) which is built as part of the LLVM
compiler infrastructure project.

Unlike many other compiler frontends, Clang is useful for a number of things
beyond just compiling code: we intend for Clang to be host to a number of
different source-level tools.  One example of this is the Clang Static Analyzer.

If you're interested in more (including how to build Clang) it is best to read
the relevant web sites.  Here are some pointers:

Information on Clang:             http://clang.llvm.org/
Building and using Clang:         http://clang.llvm.org/get_started.html
Clang Static Analyzer:            http://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/
Information on the LLVM project:  http://llvm.org/

If you have questions or comments about Clang, a great place to discuss them is
on the Clang development mailing list:
  http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

If you find a bug in Clang, please file it in the LLVM bug tracker:
  http://llvm.org/bugs/