jrtc27 added a comment. In D150875#4353484 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D150875#4353484>, @erichkeane wrote:
> In D150875#4353467 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D150875#4353467>, @jrtc27 wrote: > >> We heavily rely on this extension in CheriBSD via `__typeof__((*(p))) * >> __capability` as we want to be able to take any pointer, including to an >> array or function that needs to undergo decay to be an actual pointer, and >> turn it into a `__capability`-qualified one. Presumably you're saying we >> should instead use `__typeof__((0, (p))) __capability` as an uglier >> alternative way to force decay? > > Do you do that in C++, or just C? Note that this does NOT change the > behavior in C. In C++ I'd probably just suggest using `std::decay`. In practice just C (kernel-only macro), though ideally the macro would still work in C++ (at least on CheriBSD; C++-based OSes will differ, but can of course do their own thing). CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D150875/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D150875 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
