reikdas added a comment. In D77598#2111606 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D77598#2111606>, @rsmith wrote:
> In D77598#2064193 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D77598#2064193>, @rsmith wrote: > > > In D77598#1990197 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D77598#1990197>, @rsmith wrote: > > > > > Is is feasible to check whether the corresponding template parameter > > > either has a deduced type or is a parameter of a function template? If > > > not, we don't need to clarify the type of the template argument and could > > > leave off the suffix to shorten the printed argument. > > > > > > Ping on this comment. If possible, I'd prefer for us to not produce > > suffixes and casts in the case where there's no need to clarify the type of > > the template argument. I would imagine we can pass in a flag into the > > printing routine to indicate whether it needs to produce an expression with > > the right type, or merely one convertible to the right type. > > > This comment has not been addressed. @rsmith Can you elaborate a little on what you meant in your comment? I thought you meant that we should not print the suffixes and casts for the type if it was deduced. Did you instead mean that we should //only// print the cast and the suffix if the type is a deduced type? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D77598/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D77598 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
