nickdesaulniers added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprConstant.cpp:1324
// This is a string literal initializing an array in an initializer.
- return CGM.GetConstantArrayFromStringLiteral(E);
+ return E->isLValue() ?
+ CGM.GetAddrOfConstantStringFromLiteral(E).getPointer() :
----------------
efriedma wrote:
> nickdesaulniers wrote:
> > efriedma wrote:
> > > Maybe we should have a separate ConstExprEmitterLValue... trying to
> > > handle both LValues and RValues on the same codepath has been problematic
> > > in the past. It's very easy for code to get confused what it's actually
> > > trying to emit.
> > So we'd have a `ConstExprEmitterLValue` class with some visitor methods,
> > and a `ConstExprEmitterRValue` with other methods implemented?
> Something like that.
>
> Actually thinking about it a bit more, not sure you need to actually
> implement ConstExprEmitterLValue for now. You might just be able to ensure
> we don't ever call ConstExprEmitter with an lvalue. The current
> ConstExprEmitter doesn't expect lvalues, and shouldn't call itself with
> lvalues. (We bail on explicit LValueToRValue conversions.) And Evaluate()
> shouldn't actually evaluate the contents of an lvalue if it isn't
> dereferenced, so there hopefully aren't any performance issues using that
> codepath.
>
> In terms of implementation, I guess that's basically restoring the
> destType->isReferenceType() that got removed? (I know I suggested it, but I
> wasn't really thinking about it...)
One thing I think we may need to add to `ConstExprEmitter` is the ability to
evaluate `CallExpr`s based on certain test case failures...does that seem right?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D151587/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D151587
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
