njames93 added a comment.
In D76196#1924393 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D76196#1924393>, @aaron.ballman
wrote:
> I'm still not understanding your use case, so it's a bit hard for me to tell
> whether this approach is good or not. Do you have a situation where you
> cannot match on the expression itself, you also have to know its position?
> I'm asking because we don't currently have support for querying positional
> statements (for instance, you cannot ask what the final statement in a
> `CompoundStmt`) and statement expressions are a bit strange. For instance,
> what would the final "expression" be in this legal-but-bizarre statement
> expression: `({int j = 12; j; int x;});`?
It would be the `int x;` but not matchable as its not an expression. The way
`StmtExpr` works is it evaluates each `Stmt` in order and returns the result of
the last `Stmt`, if it is an expression. otherwise it basically returns `void`.
Possible use cases are if you want to match on say an if condition, but the
condition is inside a `StmtExpr`. I feel like there could be a better way to
get this behaviour but I'm not exactly sure what it is
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D76196/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D76196
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
