tbaeder added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/Descriptor.cpp:42
const Descriptor *D) {
+ new (Ptr) InitMapPtr(std::nullopt);
+
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> This worries me a little bit for a few reasons, but it might be okay:
>
> * What validates that the bytes pointed to by `Ptr` are aligned properly for
> an `InitMapPtr` object? Perhaps we need an `alignas` in the function
> signature to ensure correct alignment of those bytes?
> * `InitMapPtr` is `std::optional<std::pair<bool, std::shared_ptr<InitMap>>>`
> and I *think* using placement new will ensure we have correct objects in all
> the expected places, but I'm not 100% sure because we're calling the
> `nullopt` constructor here.
> * I *think* it is correct that you are not assigning the result of the
> placement `new` expression into anything; and I think we need this placement
> `new` because of the `reinterpret_cast` happening in `dtorArrayTy()`. But it
> is a bit strange to see the placement `new` hanging off on its own like this.
> Might be worth some comments explaining.
>
> CC @hubert.reinterpretcast @rsmith in case my assessment is incorrect.
I thought using placement new would just call the normal constructors anyway?
BTW, does using a `shared_ptr` here even make sense? Since this is allocated in
the `Block`, we need to call the constructor and destructors manually anyway.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D154581/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D154581
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
