rsmith added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/clang/AST/Expr.h:908-912
+ static ConstantExpr *Create(const ASTContext &Context, Expr *E) {
+ if (ConstantExpr *CE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>(E))
+ return CE;
+ return new (Context) ConstantExpr(E);
+ }
----------------
If we're creating two `ConstantExpr` wrappers for the same expression, that
seems like a bug in the caller to me. When does this happen?
================
Comment at: lib/AST/Expr.cpp:2915-2916
+ case ConstantExprClass: {
+ const Expr *Exp = cast<ConstantExpr>(this)->getSubExpr();
+ return Exp->isConstantInitializer(Ctx, false, Culprit);
+ }
----------------
Can we just return `true` here? If not, please add a FIXME saying that we
should be able to.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:4973-4974
+ if ((ICEArguments & (1 << (ArgIx - 1))) != 0)
+ Arg = ConstantExpr::Create(Context, Arg);
+
----------------
We should create this node as part of checking that the argument is an ICE (in
`SemaBuiltinConstantArg`).
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:14156-14157
+ if (!CurContext->isFunctionOrMethod())
+ E = ConstantExpr::Create(Context, E);
+
----------------
I don't understand why `CurContext` matters here. Can you explain the intent of
this check?
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54355
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
