aaron.ballman added a comment. This is generally looking good to me, with a few small nits. @rsmith, do you have thought on this?
================ Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:2875-2876 /// Returns true if there was an error, false otherwise. -bool Sema::MergeFunctionDecl(FunctionDecl *New, NamedDecl *&OldD, - Scope *S, bool MergeTypeWithOld) { +bool Sema::MergeFunctionDecl(FunctionDecl *New, NamedDecl *&OldD, Scope *S, + bool MergeTypeWithOld) { // Verify the old decl was also a function. ---------------- Seems to be a formatting-only change that's unrelated to the patch; can be reverted. ================ Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:9225 + /*NewIsUsingDecl=*/false)) { + case Sema::Ovl_Match: + case Sema::Ovl_NonFunction: ---------------- Why add `Sema::` to these? ================ Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:9383 + + auto OtherUnmarkedIter = llvm::find_if(Previous, [&](const NamedDecl *ND) { + const auto *FD = dyn_cast<FunctionDecl>(ND); ---------------- Why does this need a capture? https://reviews.llvm.org/D32332 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits