================
@@ -222,6 +222,49 @@ bool Expr::isFlexibleArrayMemberLike(
IgnoreTemplateOrMacroSubstitution);
}
+namespace {
+
+/// MemberExprVisitor - Find the MemberExpr through all of the casts, array
+/// subscripts, and unary ops. This intentionally avoids all of them because
+/// we're interested only in the MemberExpr to check if it's a flexible array
+/// member.
+class MemberExprVisitor
+ : public ConstStmtVisitor<MemberExprVisitor, const Expr *> {
+public:
+
//===--------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+ // Visitor Methods
+
//===--------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+ const Expr *Visit(const Expr *E) {
+ return ConstStmtVisitor<MemberExprVisitor, const Expr *>::Visit(E);
+ }
+ const Expr *VisitStmt(const Stmt *S) { return nullptr; }
+
+ const Expr *VisitMemberExpr(const MemberExpr *E) { return E; }
+
+ const Expr *VisitArraySubscriptExpr(const ArraySubscriptExpr *E) {
+ return Visit(E->getBase());
+ }
+ const Expr *VisitCastExpr(const CastExpr *E) {
+ return Visit(E->getSubExpr());
+ }
+ const Expr *VisitParenExpr(const ParenExpr *E) {
+ return Visit(E->getSubExpr());
+ }
+ const Expr *VisitUnaryAddrOf(const UnaryOperator *E) {
+ return Visit(E->getSubExpr());
+ }
+ const Expr *VisitUnaryDeref(const UnaryOperator *E) {
+ return Visit(E->getSubExpr());
+ }
----------------
Sirraide wrote:
> Wouldn’t it be enough to just accept a (possibly parenthesised) `MemberExpr`?
I just saw that you also have `&foo.x[0]` as a test case, but given that this
is a new builtin that no compiler supports (yet), is it too much to ask for to
require people to just write `foo.x` (or maybe e.g. `(foo.x)` because macro
shenanigans)? ;Þ
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102549
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
