hokein added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaOverload.cpp:12814
// end up here.
return SemaRef.BuildCallExpr(/*Scope*/ nullptr, NewFn.get(), LParenLoc,
MultiExprArg(Args.data(), Args.size()),
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> This results in (IIUC):
>
> ```
> CallExpr
> >RecoveryExpr (indirection we inserted)
> >>DeclRefExpr (callee)
> >Arg1
> ```
>
> Whereas when overload resolution fails, we create:
> ```
> RecoveryExpr (call)
> > OverloadExpr (callee)
> > Arg1
> ```
>
> I can see advantages for either, but is there a reason not to be consistent?
> (Which I guess means emitting the first one here)
> (Which I guess means emitting the first one here)
yes, exactly.
reasons:
- BuildCallExpr could emit diagnostics if we pass a non-dependent callee to it,
this is something we want to avoid;
- we'd save some cost -- `BuildCallExpr` has dedicated code path to handle
dependent expr;
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D89946/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D89946
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
