================
@@ -415,9 +443,55 @@ class ASTNodeTraverser
if (!T->isSugared())
Visit(T->getPattern());
}
+ void VisitAutoType(const AutoType *T) {
+ for (const auto &Arg : T->getTypeConstraintArguments())
+ Visit(Arg);
+ }
// FIXME: ElaboratedType, DependentNameType,
// DependentTemplateSpecializationType, ObjCObjectType
+ // For TypeLocs, we automatically visit the inner type loc (pointee type
etc).
+ // We must explicitly visit other lexically-nested nodes.
+ void VisitFunctionProtoTypeLoc(FunctionProtoTypeLoc TL) {
----------------
AaronBallman wrote:
>>another test with a lambda expression
> I'm not sure what such a test should do.
> `[](){}` doesn't really have meaningful TypeLocs, and `[]()->int{}` just has
> the BuiltinTypeLoc for int.
> Do you want a dump of the (implicit) call operator's typeloc?
Ah, I was thinking of the trailing return type and the types in the parameter
list, but I think I confused myself there (the `FunctionProtoTypeLoc` wouldn't
be for the lambda but for its call operator, which we already have coverage
for).
Thank you for the additional test coverage!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/65484
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
