https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM, curious why you skipped some and not others from that telecom. Likely
folks won't be able to check out the DRs until after St Louis.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94167
___
cfe-commits mailing
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94288
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94288
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -121,6 +145,21 @@ derived d2(42, 9);
#endif
}
+namespace cwg1945 { // cwg1945: no
+template struct A {
+ class B {
+class C {};
+ };
+};
+class X {
+ static int x;
+ // FIXME: this is ill-formed, because A::B::C does not end with a
simple-template-id
+ template
@@ -373,6 +373,98 @@ namespace cwg1837 { // cwg1837: 3.3
#endif
}
+namespace cwg1862 { // cwg1862: no
+template
+struct A {
+ struct B {
+void e();
+ };
+
+ void f();
+
+ struct D {
+void g();
+ };
+
+ T h();
+
+ template
+ T i();
+};
+
+template<>
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94288
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94288
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the fix!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93460
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -947,6 +947,26 @@ void TextNodeDumper::dumpDeclRef(const Decl *D, StringRef
Label) {
});
}
+void TextNodeDumper::dumpTemplateArgument(const TemplateArgument ) {
+ llvm::SmallString<128> Str;
+ {
+llvm::raw_svector_ostream SS(Str);
+TA.print(PrintPolicy, SS,
@@ -2995,13 +2996,23 @@ bool Parser::ParseUnqualifiedId(CXXScopeSpec ,
ParsedType ObjectType,
SS, ObjectType, ObjectHadErrors,
TemplateKWLoc ? *TemplateKWLoc : SourceLocation(), Id, IdLoc,
EnteringContext, Result, TemplateSpecified);
-else if
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM but I would like Tom or Aaron to also take a look
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93216
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
shafik wrote:
Can you also confirm this fixes:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/70191
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93079
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
Thank you for the fix. Can you please a little more details to your summary so
that folks reading git log have more context.
This also needs a release note.
Please also add that this also fixes:
@@ -451,6 +463,25 @@ static_assert(!__is_nothrow_constructible(D4, int), "");
#endif
} // namespace cwg1350
+namespace cwg1352 { // cwg1352: 3.0
+struct A {
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
+ int a = sizeof(A);
shafik wrote:
It also mentions in the body of
@@ -86,6 +86,23 @@ struct A {
};
}
+namespace cwg1458 { // cwg1458: 3.1
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
+struct A;
+
+void f() {
+ constexpr A* a = nullptr;
+ constexpr int p = &*a;
+ // expected-error@-1 {{cannot initialize a variable of type 'const int' with
an rvalue of
@@ -451,6 +463,25 @@ static_assert(!__is_nothrow_constructible(D4, int), "");
#endif
} // namespace cwg1350
+namespace cwg1352 { // cwg1352: 3.0
+struct A {
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
+ int a = sizeof(A);
shafik wrote:
I think it might be worth it to see
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92113
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM w/ a few nitpicks
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92113
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -467,15 +467,18 @@ class Parser : public CodeCompletionHandler {
/// Flags describing a context in which we're parsing a statement.
enum class ParsedStmtContext {
+/// This context permits declarations in language modes where declarations
+/// are not
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can you add some details to the summary. What was the original code doing wrong
and the proposed new approach.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92721
___
cfe-commits mailing list
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92721
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -11298,8 +11298,14 @@ static void DiagnoseBadConversion(Sema ,
OverloadCandidate *Cand,
Expr *FromExpr = Conv.Bad.FromExpr;
QualType FromTy = Conv.Bad.getFromType();
QualType ToTy = Conv.Bad.getToType();
- SourceRange ToParamRange =
- !isObjectArgument ?
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This makes sense given the pain we are seeing here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92740
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ namespace InExpr {
// These are valid expressions.
foo(0);
+foo(0); // expected-warning {{comparisons like 'X<=Y<=Z' don't have
their mathematical meaning}}
foo(false);
shafik wrote:
It is a shame we don't catch this one
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92295
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -167,9 +167,11 @@ Parser::DeclGroupPtrTy
Parser::ParseTemplateDeclarationOrSpecialization(
LastParamListWasEmpty);
// Parse the actual template declaration.
- if (Tok.is(tok::kw_concept))
-return Actions.ConvertDeclToDeclGroup(
-
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++20 %s
+// expected-no-diagnostics
+
+template
shafik wrote:
Nitpick wrap this in `namespace GH77377` since this is a regression test from a
bug report
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92425
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92425
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
Thank you for the additional test coverage, LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90500
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
shafik wrote:
Note there is a `BuildAnonymousStructUnionMemberReference`, I am not sure it
solves your problem.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90842
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
@@ -2876,10 +2876,21 @@ class TreeTransform {
return ExprError();
Base = BaseResult.get();
+ // We want to use `BuildMemberReferenceExpr()` so we can use its logic
+ // that materializes `Base` into a temporary if it's a prvalue.
+ // To do so, we
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for this fix.
You should reference the issue that this fixes in your summary.
This also need a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90842
___
cfe-commits mailing list
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90842
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -2803,7 +2803,207 @@ getRHSTemplateDeclAndArgs(Sema ,
TypeAliasTemplateDecl *AliasTemplate) {
return {Template, AliasRhsTemplateArgs};
}
-// Build deduction guides for a type alias template.
+// Build deduction guides for a type alias template from the given underlying
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2a -verify -ast-dump -ast-dump-decl-types
-ast-dump-filter "deduction guide" %s | FileCheck %s --strict-whitespace
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2a -verify -ast-dump -ast-dump-decl-types
-Wno-c++11-narrowing -ast-dump-filter "deduction
shafik wrote:
> @cor3ntin @shafik Hi, I want to take charge of this issue and submit a PR for
> the fix.
I would open a new PR and reference this one in the summary for completeness.
It looks like this one is not going to picked up by the author and so if you
can take it over and finish it
@@ -67,6 +68,69 @@ void B::g() requires true;
} // namespace cwg2847
+namespace cwg2851 { // cwg2851: 19
+
+#if __cplusplus >= 202002L
+template struct Val { static constexpr T value = v; };
+
+
+// Floating-point promotions
+
+static_assert(Val::value == 0.0L);
@@ -67,6 +68,69 @@ void B::g() requires true;
} // namespace cwg2847
+namespace cwg2851 { // cwg2851: 19
+
+#if __cplusplus >= 202002L
+template struct Val { static constexpr T value = v; };
+
+
+// Floating-point promotions
+
+static_assert(Val::value == 0.0L);
shafik wrote:
@MitalAshok ping
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78060
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Looks good, I will let Tom make the final accept.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90490
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -6714,14 +6714,16 @@ void Sema::CodeCompleteQualifiedId(Scope *S,
CXXScopeSpec ,
// If the scope is a concept-constrained type parameter, infer nested
// members based on the constraints.
- if (const auto *TTPT =
- dyn_cast_or_null(NNS->getAsType())) {
-
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90490
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
So this seems to apply to member pointer types, pointer types, arrays and
function types but I don't see coverage for the full set of paths in the tests.
Can we please add more testing.
Erich also expressed some concern about breaking existing code due to
shafik wrote:
The `amdgpu-toolchain.c` test failure looks unrelated. I think we need another
empty commit to kick off the build again unfortunately.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89923
___
cfe-commits mailing list
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM, thank you for the documentation fix.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90485
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
@@ -908,6 +908,74 @@ void CodeGenFunction::EmitIfStmt(const IfStmt ) {
incrementProfileCounter();
}
+bool CodeGenFunction::checkIfLoopMustProgress(const Expr
*ControllingExpression,
+ bool IsTrivialCXXLoop) {
+ if
@@ -1465,6 +1465,7 @@ void CodeGenFunction::GenerateCode(GlobalDecl GD,
llvm::Function *Fn,
// Ensure that the function adheres to the forward progress guarantee, which
// is required by certain optimizations.
+ // The attribute will be removed if the body contains a
shafik wrote:
> Looking at the logs, and the error seems to be unrelated to the changes made
> https://buildkite.com/llvm-project/clang-ci/builds/16430#018f132d-506e-440c-b18b-fed98237def9/54-5446
You can try using `--allow-empty` to do an empty commit to kick off the build
again.
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This makes sense, I added Nico since they added the change that brought in that
line.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89923
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90012
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1741,8 +1741,10 @@ void is_layout_compatible(int n)
static_assert(!__is_layout_compatible(unsigned char, signed char));
static_assert(__is_layout_compatible(int[], int[]));
static_assert(__is_layout_compatible(int[2], int[2]));
-
shafik wrote:
ping @cor3ntin
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82310
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This mostly makes sense to me, @AaronBallman does this look good to you?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72607
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
@@ -18931,7 +18931,7 @@ void Sema::MarkFunctionReferenced(SourceLocation Loc,
FunctionDecl *Func,
// constant evaluated
bool NeededForConstantEvaluation =
isPotentiallyConstantEvaluatedContext(*this) &&
- isImplicitlyDefinableConstexprFunction(Func);
+
@@ -18931,7 +18931,7 @@ void Sema::MarkFunctionReferenced(SourceLocation Loc,
FunctionDecl *Func,
// constant evaluated
bool NeededForConstantEvaluation =
isPotentiallyConstantEvaluatedContext(*this) &&
- isImplicitlyDefinableConstexprFunction(Func);
+
@@ -18931,7 +18931,7 @@ void Sema::MarkFunctionReferenced(SourceLocation Loc,
FunctionDecl *Func,
// constant evaluated
bool NeededForConstantEvaluation =
isPotentiallyConstantEvaluatedContext(*this) &&
- isImplicitlyDefinableConstexprFunction(Func);
+
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM but I want @fahadnayyar to verify this addresses his concerns.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87132
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM after addressing Aaron's comments.
Can you elaborate more on the details of the bug in the summary. This goes into
the git log and we want folks to be able to understand the problem well from
the summary w/o having to do additional checks.
Thank you
@@ -3899,6 +3899,9 @@ static QualType
GetDeclSpecTypeForDeclarator(TypeProcessingState ,
SemaRef.Diag(OwnedTagDecl->getLocation(), DiagID)
<< SemaRef.Context.getTypeDeclType(OwnedTagDecl);
D.setInvalidType(true);
+
@@ -3899,6 +3899,9 @@ static QualType
GetDeclSpecTypeForDeclarator(TypeProcessingState ,
SemaRef.Diag(OwnedTagDecl->getLocation(), DiagID)
<< SemaRef.Context.getTypeDeclType(OwnedTagDecl);
D.setInvalidType(true);
+
shafik wrote:
It looks like we do have a test and it looks like the restriction was lifted in
C++20.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87274
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
Thank you for the test! LGTM.
Do we also have a test that `sizeof([=]{ return i + j;})` should fail as well?
Tangentially related to this DR but if we don't we should cover that in our
tests someplace.
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM, interesting it looks like we don't do this check in `fromContraintExpr`
either.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86869
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85413
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -ferror-limit 0 -verify %s
shafik wrote:
Why the `ferror-limit 0`?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86794
___
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM, I will let @ilya-biryukov approve
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85405
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This is not really an NFC change so you should have waited for an approval.
This LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85534
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I believe this should have a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85494
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -4181,6 +4185,127 @@ class FunctionNoProtoType : public FunctionType, public
llvm::FoldingSetNode {
}
};
+class FunctionEffect;
+class FunctionEffectSet;
+
+// It is the user's responsibility to keep this in set form: elements are
+// ordered and unique.
+// We could
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Quick drive by comment
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84983
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -4181,6 +4185,127 @@ class FunctionNoProtoType : public FunctionType, public
llvm::FoldingSetNode {
}
};
+class FunctionEffect;
+class FunctionEffectSet;
+
+// It is the user's responsibility to keep this in set form: elements are
+// ordered and unique.
+// We could
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84983
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
It looks like it passed on your last commit but you have a conflict now which
you need to resolve.
Can you merge or do you need help with that?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80040
___
cfe-commits mailing list
shafik wrote:
> @shafik We dont have a dedicated cpp test for this. I can add one if you
> want, but clang/test/Sema/warn-compare-enum-types-mismatch.c runs clang both
> on C and C++ mode, so I didnt think it necessary.
I think we just a bug that demonstrates this issue:
shafik wrote:
Looks like the build failed b/c you did not run `git clang-format`
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84515
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -596,8 +596,21 @@ VarDecl *Sema::buildCoroutinePromise(SourceLocation Loc) {
// Add implicit object parameter.
if (auto *MD = dyn_cast(FD)) {
-if (MD->isImplicitObjectMemberFunction() && !isLambdaCallOperator(MD)) {
- ExprResult ThisExpr = ActOnCXXThis(Loc);
+
https://github.com/shafik commented:
nitpick
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84519
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84519
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84520
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Just a nit here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84520
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -993,11 +993,18 @@ MacroArgs *Preprocessor::ReadMacroCallArgumentList(Token
,
// If the macro contains the comma pasting extension, the diagnostic
// is suppressed; we know we'll get another diagnostic later.
if (!MI->hasCommaPasting()) {
-//
@@ -6,7 +6,9 @@ typedef enum EnumA {
} EnumA;
enum EnumB {
- B
+ B,
shafik wrote:
I think what I was asking, was do we have an equivalent C++ test that verifies
in a `.cpp` file that we also do not obtain a diagnostic for this.
shafik wrote:
> So I believe:
>
> ```
> typedef enum EnumA {
> A
> } EnumA;
>
> enum EnumB {
> B,
> B1 = 1,
> B2 = A == B1
> };
> ```
>
> is not an enum compare warning in C++ because `B1` doesn't have an
> enumeration type due to the enumeration not being fully-defined, and is not
shafik wrote:
Can we please get more descriptive summaries in the future. We should at a
minimum state 1) what the underlying problem is 2) what the approach for fixing
the problem is.
In this case the title describes the problem but it would be nice to have a
summary of the fix as well. So
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Should we also have a C++ test for this fix?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84068
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84184
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I think this makes sense.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84184
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+//===- SemaOpenACC.h - Semantic Analysis for OpenACC constructs
---===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier:
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Should we verify that we diagnose the case where the definition includes a
comma?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84169
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
@@ -1434,13 +1434,18 @@ ExprResult Sema::ActOnCXXThis(SourceLocation Loc) {
return Diag(Loc, diag::err_invalid_this_use) << 0;
}
- return BuildCXXThisExpr(Loc, ThisTy, /*IsImplicit=*/false);
+ return BuildCXXThisExpr(Loc, ThisTy, /*IsImplicit=*/false,
+
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -I%S/Inputs -std=c++20 %s
+
+// expected-no-diagnostics
+
+#include "std-coroutine.h"
+
+using size_t = decltype(sizeof(0));
+
+struct Generator {
+ struct promise_type {
+int _val{};
+
+Generator
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Late review but LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83715
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83476
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83611
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -5042,7 +5042,7 @@ void RecordDecl::completeDefinition() {
// Layouts are dumped when computed, so if we are dumping for all complete
// types, we need to force usage to get types that wouldn't be used
elsewhere.
- if (Ctx.getLangOpts().DumpRecordLayoutsComplete)
+
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I think this makes sense but I would like another set of eyes.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83688
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83688
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83686
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83686
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
1 - 100 of 562 matches
Mail list logo
