AaronBallman wrote: > Hmm, I think what this section is trying to demonstrate is that ‘_According > to the standard_, this is in the path of execution and therefore _supposed_ > to be considered unlikely, but we don’t do that’, so maybe it’d be better to > reword/expand the comment instead?
This matches my understanding. Basically, the `CompoundStmt` that gets added for that example makes the `NullStmt` the second statement in the branch rather than the first, and we give up on that, IIUC. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126372 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
