================
@@ -551,24 +541,21 @@ getHLSLResourceAttrFromEitherDecl(VarDecl *VD,
// the resource attr could be on the record decl itself or on one of
// its fields (the resource handle, most commonly)
----------------
damyanp wrote:
I was going to add a comment about the name of this function, but then I
realized I'm not sure that we really want it to be as flexible as it is. I
think we actually only want to support the attribute being on the handle
member, we don't need to support it being on the record itself, do we? I think
we should be crisp about this rather than being flexible - it'll reduce the
testing coverage needed as well.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97103
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
