lebedev.ri added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D49508#1168584, @rjmccall wrote:
> Hmm. I think the approach of flagging ICEs that are semantically part of an > explicit cast is probably a better representation for tools across the board. I could do that, but i couldn't find where it should be done. Where are these "ICEs that are semantically part of an explicit cast" created? Where would we mark them? > If we *are* going to do it this way, though, I think you should (1) make the > collection of skipped expressions optional and (2) collect *all* the skipped > expressions, not just no-op casts. 1. I was wondering about that, will do. 2. Well, i could do that, but i would need to filter them afterwards in my use-case. So i wonder - what is the motivation for that? Nothing else needs that additional knowledge right now. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D49508 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
