Anastasia marked 2 inline comments as done.
Anastasia added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/DeclSpec.cpp:220
+
+ I.Fun.QualAttrFactory = nullptr;
+
----------------
rjmccall wrote:
> Spacing?
I am keeping the old formatting from the lines 195-204. But obviously it
doesn't match with the current clang-format rules. Do you prefer that I
reformat the whole block or just this line?
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp:8175
DeclaratorChunk::FunctionTypeInfo &FTI = D.getFunctionTypeInfo();
- if (FTI.TypeQuals != 0) {
- if (FTI.TypeQuals & Qualifiers::Const)
- Diag(D.getIdentifierLoc(), diag::err_invalid_qualified_constructor)
- << "const" << SourceRange(D.getIdentifierLoc());
- if (FTI.TypeQuals & Qualifiers::Volatile)
- Diag(D.getIdentifierLoc(), diag::err_invalid_qualified_constructor)
- << "volatile" << SourceRange(D.getIdentifierLoc());
- if (FTI.TypeQuals & Qualifiers::Restrict)
- Diag(D.getIdentifierLoc(), diag::err_invalid_qualified_constructor)
- << "restrict" << SourceRange(D.getIdentifierLoc());
+ if (FTI.MethodQualifiers && FTI.MethodQualifiers->getTypeQualifiers() != 0) {
+ auto DiagQual = [&](DeclSpec::TQ TypeQual, StringRef QualName,
----------------
rjmccall wrote:
> I think you should add a `hasMethodQualifiers` method to FTI that does this
> check. Note that it needs to check for attributes, too, and I think you need
> to figure out some way to generalize `forEachCVRUQual` to cover those.
Are there any attributes I should handle currently?
Also are you suggesting to add another `forEach...` method or extend existing?
If the latter, I might not be able to use it in all places I use it now.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55948/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55948
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
