george.burgess.iv added inline comments. ================ Comment at: include/clang/AST/Expr.h:541-546 @@ -540,1 +540,8 @@ + /// \brief Whether the evaluation was unable to reduce a construct to a + /// value. + /// + /// For example, in foo(bar, baz, qux), if evaluating bar fails, we may + /// try to evaluate baz and qux anyway. + bool HasFailure; + ---------------- rsmith wrote: > I don't think this provides enough guarantees to be useful as part of the > external `EvalStatus` results. Can you sink this into `EvalInfo`? > Alternatively, can you merge this with `HasSideEffects`? I don't think we > need to maintain a distinction between the two different ways we can get an > evaluation result after skipping a subexpression. > I don't think this provides enough guarantees to be useful as part of the > external EvalStatus results. Can you sink this into EvalInfo
WFM > Alternatively, can you merge this with `HasSideEffects`. The result is a bit more subtle (because some things depend on `HasSideEffects` being accurate, and not being set whenever we fail), but sure. http://reviews.llvm.org/D18540 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
