llvmbot wrote:
<!--LLVM PR SUMMARY COMMENT--> @llvm/pr-subscribers-clang Author: Timm Baeder (tbaederr) <details> <summary>Changes</summary> Since this must be true, add an assertion instead of just documenting it via the comment. --- Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105927.diff 1 Files Affected: - (modified) clang/lib/AST/ByteCode/Interp.h (+5-3) ``````````diff diff --git a/clang/lib/AST/ByteCode/Interp.h b/clang/lib/AST/ByteCode/Interp.h index 7ba51f737db491..81c547991c3d7d 100644 --- a/clang/lib/AST/ByteCode/Interp.h +++ b/clang/lib/AST/ByteCode/Interp.h @@ -2608,9 +2608,11 @@ inline bool Call(InterpState &S, CodePtr OpPC, const Function *Func, // the function we're about to call is a lambda call operator, // skip the CheckInvoke, since the ThisPtr is a null pointer // anyway. - if (!(S.Current->getFunction() && - S.Current->getFunction()->isLambdaStaticInvoker() && - Func->isLambdaCallOperator())) { + if (S.Current->getFunction() && + S.Current->getFunction()->isLambdaStaticInvoker() && + Func->isLambdaCallOperator()) { + assert(ThisPtr.isZero()); + } else { if (!CheckInvoke(S, OpPC, ThisPtr)) return false; } `````````` </details> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105927 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
