https://github.com/MitalAshok converted_to_draft
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78035
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -39,7 +39,43 @@ namespace addressof {
struct U { int n : 5; } u;
int *pbf = __builtin_addressof(u.n); // expected-error {{address of
bit-field requested}}
- S *ptmp = __builtin_addressof(S{}); // expected-error {{taking the address
of a temporary}} expected-warning
https://github.com/MitalAshok updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78035
>From 33af5fc0a2e1ec2168a1609508cb119034801908 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mital Ashok
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2024 10:48:21 +
Subject: [PATCH] [SemaCXX] Make __builtin_addressof more like std::addressof
@@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ static bool SemaBuiltinAddressof(Sema , CallExpr
*TheCall) {
return true;
ExprResult Arg(TheCall->getArg(0));
- QualType ResultType = S.CheckAddressOfOperand(Arg, TheCall->getBeginLoc());
+ QualType ResultType = S.CheckAddressOfOperand(Arg,
https://github.com/erichkeane commented:
Need a release note as well. I don't think I'm great for reviewing this, so
I'll leave it to aaron to decide on the direction.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78035
___
cfe-commits mailing list
https://github.com/erichkeane edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78035
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
cor3ntin wrote:
I think the approach makes sense but I'd like other folks to weight in
@AaronBallman @erichkeane.
Note that even if we wanted in the long term to do the work to support
overloaded expression (which i would agree is probably not a high priority),
fixing the crash seems to be
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code.
:warning:
You can test this locally with the following command:
``bash
git-clang-format --diff 8d817f6479a5df874028a8b40fd30aecd3479005
7384e99c5fc1bcba1a304735243e49e9738691aa --
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Mital Ashok (MitalAshok)
Changes
Fixes #77928
There are a few places which expect that, if for an expression
`E-getType()-isBuiltinType(BuiltinType::Overload)`, then `E` must be an
`OverloadExpr` or a `UnaryOperator` where
https://github.com/MitalAshok created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78035
Fixes #77928
There are a few places which expect that, if for an expression
`E->getType()->isBuiltinType(BuiltinType::Overload)`, then `E` must be an
`OverloadExpr` or a `UnaryOperator` where
10 matches
Mail list logo
