aaronpuchert added a comment.
I'd probably abstain from explicitly deleting what is already implicitly
deleted, but otherwise this looks good to me. Thanks!
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Sema/Sema.h:1790
SemaDiagnosticBuilder(const SemaDiagnosticBuilder &) = default;
+ SemaDiagnosticBuilder &operator=(const SemaDiagnosticBuilder &) = delete;
~SemaDiagnosticBuilder();
----------------
tahonermann wrote:
>
Being explicit is certainly a good thing, but the C++ committee wants to go
into the direction of "copy/move operations are implicitly deleted if any of
them or the destructor is user-declared." See
[depr.impldec](https://eel.is/c++draft/depr.impldec). It is already partially
the case, for example here. So why do need to spell something out explicitly
when the language goes into the direction of being even more implicit?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D150411/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D150411
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
