rsmith added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp:3459-3461
+ if (MemInit.get()->getInit() &&
+ MemInit.get()->getInit()->containsErrors())
+ AnyErrors = true;
----------------
The parser should not be inspecting properties of `Expr`s -- that's a layering
violation. Can you move this logic into `ActOnMemInitializers` instead?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp:1688
CheckConstexprKind Kind) {
+ assert(!NewFD->isInvalidDecl());
const CXXMethodDecl *MD = dyn_cast<CXXMethodDecl>(NewFD);
----------------
Instead of asserting this, please just return false on an invalid declaration.
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with calling this function on an invalid
declaration, but as usual, if we encounter something invalid, we should
suppress follow-on diagnostics.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp:5005
+ if (Member->getInit() && Member->getInit()->containsErrors())
+ Constructor->setInvalidDecl();
if (Member->isBaseInitializer())
----------------
This is inappropriate. The "invalid" bit on a declaration indicates whether the
declaration is invalid, not whether the definition is invalid.
What we should do is add a "contains errors" bit to `Stmt`, and mark the
function body as containing errors if it has an initializer that contains an
error.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77041/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77041
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
