rsmith added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp:13121-13122
+ if (VD->isNoDestroy(getASTContext()) &&
+ !(VD->getType()->isArrayType() && getLangOpts().Exceptions &&
+ VD->isStaticLocal()))
return;
----------------
Hmm, perhaps it would be cleaner if the destructor for array elements were
required by the initialization of the array, instead of here. That's how this
works for struct aggregate initialization (see
`InitListChecker::CheckStructUnionTypes`), and (indirectly) how it works for
initialization by constructor, and so on. And it reflects the fact that it's
the initialization process that needs the array element destructor, not the
destruction of the variable (which never happens).
For the case of aggregate initialization of an array, we appear to fail to
implement [dcl.init.aggr]/8:
"""
The destructor for each element of class type is potentially invoked (11.3.6)
from the context where the aggregate initialization occurs. [Note: This
provision ensures that destructors can be called for fully-constructed
subobjects in case an exception is thrown (14.2). — end note]
"""
(But there doesn't appear to be any corresponding wording for default / value
initialization of arrays. See also the special case at the end of
`BuildCXXNewExpr`.)
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D61165/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D61165
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
