aaron.ballman added a comment. In D108403#2955651 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108403#2955651>, @erichkeane wrote:
> This whole function seems a little suspect, but I don't have a good example > of a place it would break. Is there no cases where a lookup could result in > the same COUNT but different declaration set? I guess it is more the question > of whether a transparent context can 'lose' a name lookup (perhaps a case of > conflicting names?), then have it added by the local namespace. I don't believe transparent contexts can lose a name lookup -- they're transparent, so the declarations aren't owned by that context, they're owned by the first non-transparent context they run into (as I understand it, anyway). However, the important bit on this patch is: `lookup()` asserts that you're not trying to call it on a transparent context, so that tells me that we should walk until we find a non-transparent context rather than the current approach of assuming the parent is not transparent. ================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/AST/Decl.h:620 + const DeclContext *Parent = getParent(); + while (Parent->isTransparentContext()) + Parent = Parent->getParent(); ---------------- erichkeane wrote: > This loop seems useful enough to be its own function in DeclContext? I think > I remember seeing us do this for a different patch, right? This pattern does appear in the code base a few places; I could add a new helper method. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D108403/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D108403 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
