cchen marked 4 inline comments as done.
cchen added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGOpenMPRuntime.cpp:7616
dyn_cast<OMPArraySectionExpr>(I->getAssociatedExpression());
+ const auto *UO = dyn_cast<UnaryOperator>(I->getAssociatedExpression());
bool IsPointer =
----------------
ABataev wrote:
> What about binary operator?
Didn't add check here since I didn't add any binary operator into Component in
the MapBaseChecker class. Should I add it?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaOpenMP.cpp:15698
+ }
+ bool VisitBinaryOperator(BinaryOperator *BO) {
+ if (SemaRef.getLangOpts().OpenMP < 50) {
----------------
ABataev wrote:
> Better to discuss the implementation for this in a separate patch, it really
> requires some additional analysis and extra work.
Why should we do this in another patch? The only thing this patch does is
extending for pointer arithmetic (doing analysis on BinOp).
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaOpenMP.cpp:15712
+ const std::string RTS = RT->getCanonicalTypeInternal().getAsString();
+ auto CntLayer = [](char c) { return c == '*' || c == '['; };
+ size_t LLayerCnt = std::count_if(LTS.begin(), LTS.end(), CntLayer);
----------------
ABataev wrote:
> Again, bad idea to count this stuff.
Will it be better if just check if the subtree is an offset? So that we only
need to check if it does not have any decorator in type?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaOpenMP.cpp:15729
+ Components.emplace_back(CTE, nullptr);
+ this->RelevantExpr = cast<Expr>(CTE);
+ }
----------------
ABataev wrote:
> No need for `this->`
Will fix this.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75077/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75077
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
