================
@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
+// This file tests the coro_structured_concurrency attribute semantics.
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -disable-llvm-passes -emit-llvm %s -o - |
FileCheck %s
+
+#include "Inputs/coroutine.h"
+#include "Inputs/utility.h"
+
+template <typename T>
+struct [[clang::coro_structured_concurrency]] Task {
----------------
vogelsgesang wrote:
> through a handle you smuggled with the task, which this type does not allow
> to do
that's the point I am getting at. Most `task` types do not allow smuggling
handles out of the wrappers types. As such, I expect that many task types would
be annotated with both `coro_structured_concurrency` / `coro_inplace_task` and
`coro_only_destroy_when_complete`. I guess we should have a test case that both
attributes interact nicely with each other?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94693
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
