Anastasia added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D26794#598784, @Anastasia wrote:
> I have created a bug to Khronos regarding this, but unfortunately I don't see > it being progressed yet. > https://cvs.khronos.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15659 > > The problem here is that I am not sure we should deviate from the ObjC > implementation because OpenCL blocks are largely taken from Clang ObjC > implementation. My issue is in particular that it's not clear what the > capture of array would mean and spec should either state it precisely or > disallow using this feature at all to avoid costly operations. In ObjC > community itself there were multiple interpretation of this in the past: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2016-March/047849.html > > I am not sure we should go ahead with any implementation without further > clarifications. I will ping the Khronos bug to see if the documentation can > be improved. > > I think this issue has been seen in the OpenCL conformance tests, but was > fixed later on? Sure. Do you have an access to revision with an update? I will ask to publish it online too. ================ Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:13481 + // Only if it's not OpenCL 2.0. + if (!(S.getLangOpts().OpenCL && S.getLangOpts().OpenCLVersion >= 200)) { + if (CaptureType->isArrayType()) { ---------------- Can we do this consistently for all OpenCL (Not just v2.0)! https://reviews.llvm.org/D26794 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
