saar.raz added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/AST/StmtProfile.cpp:1325 + // expression. It is equivalent to the simple-requirement x++; [...] + // We therefore do not profile isSimple() here. + ID.AddBoolean(ExprReq->getNoexceptLoc().isValid()); ---------------- rsmith wrote: > We don't /need to/ profile `isSimple`, but we still could. (This "is > equivalent to" doesn't override the general ODR requirement that you spell > the expression with the same token sequence.) > > Do we mangle simple and compound requirements the same way? (Has a mangling > for requires-expressions even been proposed on the Itanium ABI list yet?) Not yet :( Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D50360/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D50360 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
