steveire added a comment. In D80961#2074915 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D80961#2074915>, @steveire wrote:
> I don't think that's true. You have to change the matchers you've written > which deliberately match the instantiation, but you can also (optionally) > simplify the others to remove `unless(isInTemplateInstantiation())` from > them. The third category of matchers are the ones where you haven't used > `unless(isInTemplateInstantiation())` even though you should have and you > have a bug that you don't know about yet. This change fixes those ones. This seems to be an example of that third category: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81336 > > >> I love the idea of being able to control visitation of template >> instantiation. >> I am somewhat torn on whether it should be the default, and would like to >> see more data. >> I feel more strongly about needing AsIs when I want to match template >> instantiations. > > I feel strongly that the default should not change code in a known-wrong way, > as the unit test demonstrates. It's not a novice-friendly default. Any more feelings on this? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80961/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80961 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
