hokein added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/AST/DependencyFlags.h:57
+ struct NAME##Scope {
\
+ enum NAME {
\
+ UnexpandedPack = 1,
\
----------------
should we make the enum as `uint8_t` as the other `ExprDependence` above?
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/AST/DependencyFlags.h:81
+ auto E =
+ static_cast<ExprDependence>(TA & ~TemplateArgumentDependence::Dependent);
+ if (TA & TemplateArgumentDependence::Dependent)
----------------
nit: I think we can get rid of the `static_cast`, sine we already use
`LLVM_MARK_AS_BITMASK_ENUM`.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/AST/Type.h:1468
- /// Whether this type is a dependent type (C++ [temp.dep.type]).
- unsigned Dependent : 1;
----------------
would be nice to keep this comments in the new `TypeDependence` struct.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/TemplateName.cpp:173
+TemplateNameDependence TemplateName::getDependence() const {
+ auto F = TemplateNameDependence::None;
+ if (QualifiedTemplateName *QTN = getAsQualifiedTemplateName()) {
----------------
This part of refactoring seems a little scary to me, I think it is correct by
comparing with the previous version. but the getDependence() now is very
**complicated**, I have no idea what it is doing.
instead of merging three different non-trivial if branches into a single
function, maybe keep them as it-is.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71920/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71920
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
