YexuanXiao wrote: > > I don't think we can do that, at least for C, because that means this code > > would then be accepted when it shouldn't be, right? > > Yeah, I am not sure we can do this now then. It seems odd to allow calls to > builtins to change their return 'type' (or at least, return sugar) based on > when they are included. Even if we did, we would have to make sure it > actually WAS SIZE_TYPE and not a different typedef. > > So I guess we're back to: are we ok with this? > > ``` > sizeof(int); // returns an unsigned integer type > #include <stddef.h> > sizeof(int); // now returns a typedef to an unsigned integer type > ```
The current implementation retains the possibility for users to write `typedef typeof(sizeof(int)) size_t`, while all other scenarios fall outside the intended design. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136542 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
