cor3ntin added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/DeclCXX.cpp:3232
+VarDecl *ValueDecl::getPotentiallyDecomposedVarDecl() {
+ assert((isa<VarDecl>(this) || isa<BindingDecl>(this)) &&
+ "expected a VarDecl or a BindingDecl");
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> cor3ntin wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > >
> > That's future tech, `assert` would part that as 2 macros arguments!
> Ugh.
>
> `(isa<VarDecl, BindingDecl>(this)) && ...`
>
> should suppress that problem, right? I don't feel strongly though.
Oh right, that works too :)
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:19648-19649
// odr-used, but we may still need to track them for lambda capture.
// FIXME: Do we also need to do this inside dependent typeid expressions
// (which are modeled as unevaluated at this point)?
+ DoMarkPotentialCapture(SemaRef, Loc, Var, E);
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> Should this comment be moved elsewhere, as it now seems detached from the
> original logic.
I think it's still relevant. the logic is still doing lambda captures, and we
still don't need to do anything else, and the fixme is not resolved.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137244/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137244
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
