hamzasood added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/AST/ExprCXX.cpp:979
+SourceRange LambdaExpr::getExplicitTemplateParameterListRange() const {
+ TemplateParameterList *List = getTemplateParameterList();
----------------
faisalv wrote:
> I think this should return an invalid range if getExplicitCount is 0.
> might assert that when not 0, langleloc does not equal rangleloc.
>
I think it does return an invalid range in that case. Without explicit template
parameters, getLAngleLoc and getRAngleLoc return invalid locations. And a range
of invalid locations is an invalid range. But I suppose that could be asserted
to make sure.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaLambda.cpp:495
+ reinterpret_cast<NamedDecl *const *>(TParams.begin()),
+ reinterpret_cast<NamedDecl *const *>(TParams.end()));
+ LSI->NumExplicitTemplateParams = TParams.size();
----------------
faisalv wrote:
> ack - avoid reinterpret cast please - why not just stick to Decl* for
> TemplateParams for now - and add some fixme's that suggest we should
> consider refactoring ParseTemplateParameterList to accept a vector of
> nameddecls - and update this when that gets updated ?
>
> Perhaps add an assert here that iterates through and checks to make sure each
> item in this list is some form of a template parameter decl - within an
> #ifndef NDEBUG block (or your conversion check to NameDecl should suffice?)
Unfortunately `TemplateParameterList::Create` expects an array of `NamedDecl`,
so there’ll need to be a forced downcast somewhere. By getting that over with
as soon as possible, any errors will be caught straight away by that assertion
instead of moving the problem down the line somewhere and making it more
difficult to see where it went wrong.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36527
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
