c8ef wrote: > I think I agree with @mizvekov's idea of merging the parameter checks into > SemaType; we can probably in part reuse GetTypeForDeclarator. I would > appreciate it if we can see some exploration here.
Apologies for the delayed response. The implementation I provided is actually derived from `GetTypeForDeclarator`, specifically `GetFullTypeForDeclarator`. The challenge I faced is that this function handles numerous cases. My initial idea was to extract a function from `GetTypeForDeclarator` to manage function parameters, but I'm uncertain if this is the best approach. I'm wondering what level of granularity we should aim for when reusing the current implementation in `GetTypeForDeclarator`? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109831 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
