void added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/AST/Designator.h:88
+ /// An array designator, e.g., "[42] = 0" and "[42 ... 50] = 1".
+ template <typename Ty> struct ArrayDesignatorInfo {
+ /// Location of the first and last index expression within the designated
----------------
void wrote:
> rsmith wrote:
> > Can we move the templating out from here to the whole `Designator` and
> > `Designation` classes? It shouldn't be possible to mix the two kinds in the
> > same `Designation`.
> Grr...My previous comment was eaten.
>
> I'll give it a shot.
>
> However, I'm a bit surprised at how designators are handled by Clang. I
> expected that a `Designation` would be an `Expr` with the `Designator`s being
> L-values (e.g. `MemberExpr`s / `ArraySubscriptExpr`s), but instead the
> `Designation` exists just long enough to be turned into an explicit
> initialization list. Is there a reason to do it that way instead of using
> expressions?
So it looks like moving the template outside of the class won't work. The
ability to switch between `Expr` and `unsigned` while retaining the same
overall type is hardwired into things like the `ASTImporter`.
This is kind of a massive mess. Maybe we shouldn't even allow them to use both
`Expr` and `unsigned` but instead require them to use one or the other? Maybe
we could require `unsigned` with the understanding that the `Expr` can be
converted into a constant?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D140584/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D140584
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
