vsapsai added a comment. In D55543#1328034 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55543#1328034>, @smeenai wrote:
> I'd tried this exact same patch back in https://reviews.llvm.org/D44619, but > I was running into a bunch of check-clang failures with it, and I was never > able to figure them out. It looks like it works now though, so I'm glad :) > Richard's comment from that diff might still be relevant: > > > Please add a test to ensure that we still destroy function parameters in > > the right order and at the right times (for both the exceptional and > > non-exceptional cleanup cases). > > This will also resolve https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36748 Thanks, Shoaib, for extra information. Maybe I don't see any failing tests because I'm not testing on Windows. At least I want to try a sample you've provided in https://reviews.llvm.org/D44619#1056458 CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D55543/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D55543 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
