================ @@ -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 cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits