HazardyKnusperkeks accepted this revision. HazardyKnusperkeks added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
In D153641#4444465 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D153641#4444465>, @rymiel wrote: > @HazardyKnusperkeks I'm not sure why it didn't recurse already, given that > you even documented that it doesn't, but I chose to trust in the Beyoncé rule. Most likely I didn't thought about what you now fixed and wanted to limit the scope of my change. I'm trying to think of something you may broke, but I can't. Declaring functions should not be possible, if one already set the binary operator, right? Lambdas would be possible, but they should be handled correctly, but I think you could add something with `[](T&&){}(t)` in a clause, to show that it is correctly parsed. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D153641/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D153641 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
