samitolvanen marked an inline comment as done. samitolvanen added a comment.
In D108479#3133578 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108479#3133578>, @rjmccall wrote: > If we do need to support constant expressions of this Yes, we need this also in constant expressions. > I think we should have the constant evaluator produce an expression rather > than an l-value, the way we do with some other builtin calls. That should > stop the comparison problem more generally. Sure, I can take a look at how that would work. Basically, in `PointerExprEvaluator::VisitBuiltinCallExpr` we should not evaluate the l-value and just leave it at `Result.set(E)`? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D108479/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D108479 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
