rsmith added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:10246-10253
@@ -10245,1 +10245,10 @@
+
+ if (RHS.get()->getType() == Context.OverloadTy) {
+ // As a set of extensions to C, we support overloading on functions.
These
+ // functions need to be resolved here.
+ DeclAccessPair DAP;
+ if (FunctionDecl *FD = ResolveAddressOfOverloadedFunction(
+ RHS.get(), LHS.get()->getType(), /*Complain=*/false, DAP))
+ RHS = FixOverloadedFunctionReference(RHS.get(), DAP, FD);
+ }
}
----------------
Converting the RHS to the type of the LHS seems to only be appropriate for
simple assignment operators, not for arbitrary binary operators.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaInit.cpp:4978-4990
@@ -4977,1 +4977,15 @@
+ // As an extension, C can have overloaded functions. We need to add the
+ // address resolution step.
+ if (Initializer->getType() == Context.OverloadTy) {
+ bool MultipleCandidates;
+ DeclAccessPair DAP;
+ if (FunctionDecl *FD = S.ResolveAddressOfOverloadedFunction(
+ Initializer, DestType, false, DAP, &MultipleCandidates)) {
+ AddAddressOverloadResolutionStep(FD, DAP, MultipleCandidates);
+ } else {
+ SetFailed(InitializationSequence::FK_AddressOfOverloadFailed);
+ return;
+ }
+ }
+
----------------
It would seem better to handle this in the assignment rules rather than
duplicating it between here and the binary operator case.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13607
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
