lichray marked an inline comment as done. lichray added a comment. In D113393#3340878 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D113393#3340878>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> I spotted some test coverage that I think we should add: > > static_cast<auto>(whatever); > reinterpret_cast<auto>(whatever); > const_cast<auto>(whatever); > dynamic_cast<auto>(whatever); > (auto)whatever; Done. > Are there changes needed for the AST printer for this new form of cast > notation? Wow, I broke AST print. CTAD works in expressions and new because their specializations are valid type-ids... > I suppose one other question worth asking: if we're allowing > `decltype(auto)(whatever)` as a Clang extension, should we be accepting > `__typeof__(auto)(whatever)` as well? We don't allow `__typeof__(auto)` type-specifier at the moment, so not yet. I think it may be more reasonable to allow both `__typeof__(auto)` and `typeof(auto)` when implementing C23 `typeof`. Their expression forms should be useful in C++. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D113393/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D113393 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
