erichkeane wrote: > The committee says so > > Because launder is just adding a fence on a pointer to T, we need not know > what T is. > > I don't know whether there are scenarios where calling launder on an > incomplete type would be useful (as presumably you would new an object right > before which would require completeness) but it's also harmless.
Thanks! That wasn't clear to me from the bug report/commit message. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91070 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
