Be a little more permissive than C99: allow 'unsigned' to be used for
the field width and precision of a format specifier instead of just
'int'. This matches GCC, and fixes <rdar://problem/6079850>.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@94856 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
diff --git a/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp b/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp
index 38f3f2d..f10c8a1 100644
--- a/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp
+++ b/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp
@@ -1151,10 +1151,14 @@
}
// Type check the data argument. It should be an 'int'.
+ // Although not in conformance with C99, we also allow the argument to be
+ // an 'unsigned int' as that is a reasonably safe case. GCC also
+ // doesn't emit a warning for that case.
const Expr *Arg = getDataArg(NumConversions);
QualType T = Arg->getType();
- const BuiltinType *BT = T->getAs<BuiltinType>();
- if (!BT || BT->getKind() != BuiltinType::Int) {
+ const BuiltinType *BT = T->getAs<BuiltinType>();
+ if (!BT || (BT->getKind() != BuiltinType::Int &&
+ BT->getKind() != BuiltinType::UInt)) {
S.Diag(getLocationOfByte(Amt.getStart()), BadTypeDiag)
<< T
<< getFormatSpecifierRange(startSpecifier, specifierLen)