================
@@ -6027,6 +6027,33 @@ static bool EvaluateBinaryTypeTrait(Sema &Self,
TypeTrait BTT, const TypeSourceI
return cast<CXXRecordDecl>(rhsRecord->getDecl())
->isDerivedFrom(cast<CXXRecordDecl>(lhsRecord->getDecl()));
}
+ case BTT_IsVirtualBaseOf: {
+ const RecordType *BaseRecord = LhsT->getAs<RecordType>();
+ const RecordType *DerivedRecord = RhsT->getAs<RecordType>();
+
+ if (!BaseRecord || !DerivedRecord) {
+ DiagnoseVLAInCXXTypeTrait(Self, Lhs, tok::kw___is_virtual_base_of);
+ DiagnoseVLAInCXXTypeTrait(Self, Rhs, tok::kw___is_virtual_base_of);
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ if (BaseRecord->isUnionType() || DerivedRecord->isUnionType())
+ return false;
+
+ if (!BaseRecord->isStructureOrClassType() ||
+ !DerivedRecord->isStructureOrClassType())
+ return false;
+
+ if (Self.RequireCompleteType(Rhs->getTypeLoc().getBeginLoc(), RhsT,
+ diag::err_incomplete_type))
+ return false;
+
+ if (Self.Context.hasSameUnqualifiedType(LhsT, RhsT))
+ return false;
----------------
Endilll wrote:
> but I don’t think it’s possible for a type to be its own base class—virtual
> or not—
Well, `std::is_base_of_v<T, T>` is ought to be true per
http://eel.is/c++draft/meta.rel#lib:is_base_of, even though I don't see this in
core language wording (which might be the reason this is specified in the
library in the first place).
> Is the check for virtual bases expensive?
I haven't measured, but why do more work when we can help it?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100393
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
