tahonermann added a comment. > I wouldn't think so either? In this case the problem is that 'u' is not in > the re-manufactured scope, I think there is a bit of work to make sure that > lambdas ALSO get the scope of their containing function, if they are in a > functiondecl.
I wouldn't expect lambdas to require special handling; I think they should be handled via their transformation to a member function of a dependent local class or dependent member class. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D119544/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D119544 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
