rsmith accepted this revision. rsmith added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
The responses to the various testcases you posted look OK to me. The language rules aren't clear, and we can revisit this if they get clarified in a different direction, but treating lambdas in variable templates the same as function definitions seems reasonable for now. In D76038#1991426 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D76038#1991426>, @aaronpuchert wrote: > Adding @ahatanak and @sepavloff since I'm effectively reverting D23096 > <https://reviews.llvm.org/D23096> now. This looks reasonable to me, but maybe ping @ahatanak (on email / IRC / wherever) to make sure this isn't breaking something we don't have a test for. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D76038/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D76038 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
