rsmith added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h:2065
if (const CXXRecordDecl *RD = MD->getParent()) {
- if (RD->isLambda()) {
+ if (RD->isLambda() && RD->getLambdaCallOperator() == MD) {
VisitBody = VisitBody && getDerived().shouldVisitLambdaBody();
----------------
In principle there can be multiple declarations of the lambda call operator if
we merge multiple lambdas from different modules; we should check for any
declaration of the `operator()` here rather than the exact one that
`getLambdaCallOperator` returns.
I'd previously thought we could use `isLambdaCallOperator` here, but I think
that's wrong: for a generic lambda, that would skip instantiations of the
templated `operator()`, whereas I think you only want to skip the body of the
primary template in that case, and still visit the instantiations, right? Eg,
given:
```
auto x = [](auto n) { return n; };
int n = x(0);
```
... you'd want to skip the body of the template `<lambda>::operator()(T)`, but
you'd still want to visit the body of `<lambda>::operator()<int>(int)`, right?
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp:485
+ A a;
+ auto l = [a] { };
+ auto lCopy = l;
----------------
steveire wrote:
> I don't know how to create a lambda with a default ctor body.
I think that's probably not actually possible, sorry for misleading you on
that! You can introduce a copy constructor with a body (by giving `A` a
non-trivial copy constructor), though, if you want to test that.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95644/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95644
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
