sammccall added a comment.
@rsmith: we have two open questions here...
---
1: Expressions whose types are no longer dependent.
In the rare case where RHS is type-dependent and LHS is a known pointer, e.g.
template <typename Idx>
int access(int *arr, Idx i) {
return arr[i];
}
we're now changing the ArraySubscriptExpr's type from DependentTy to int, while
keeping the expr type-dependent.
Is this OK, or should we avoid it by artificially requiring LHS specifically to
be type-dependent to do the refinement?
---
2: LHS vs RHS symmetry.
We only bother to check if **LHS** is a pointer, so
`type_dependent_pointer[integer]` gets a specific dependent type, while the
obscure `integer[type_dependent_pointer]` remains DependentTy.
Is this OK, or must we handle the rare case in the same way?
---
Functionally, doing the "safe" thing in both cases seems fine. But I don't want
to spray unnecessary defensive code around, for maintenance reasons.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D107275/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D107275
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
