mstorsjo marked 2 inline comments as done.
mstorsjo added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/AST/Decl.cpp:3283
if (Context.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus)
return false;
----------------
nickdesaulniers wrote:
> I would have thought the existing case here would handle your change. If it
> doesn't, why not? Should your change also remove this (essentially moving it
> earlier)?
With the `gnu_inline` attribute on a function, the block above can end up
returning `FoundBody = true`.
So yes, I guess one would get the same effect by just moving the existing if
statement up past the gnu inline block.
================
Comment at: lib/AST/Decl.cpp:3381
// The rest of this function is C-only.
assert(!Context.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus &&
"should not use C inline rules in C++");
----------------
nickdesaulniers wrote:
> Ditto.
Hmm, if moved above, I guess we should convert the assert to a plain `if
(CPlusPlus) return false;` instead?
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D67414/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D67414
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
