hokein added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaOverload.cpp:12808
+ // using RecoveryExpr.
+ return SemaRef.CreateRecoveryExpr(CallE.get()->getBeginLoc(),
+ CallE.get()->getEndLoc(), {CallE.get()});
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> is it a deliberate decision to drop the return type of the recovery function
> here too? If so, mention it in the comment (currentyl you only talk about not
> preserving the real call node)
yes, we deliberately use a dependent-type for recovery-expr to suppress
diagnostics (rely on clang's dependent mechanism).
================
Comment at: clang/test/AST/ast-dump-recovery.cpp:277
+void TypoCorrection() {
+ // CHECK: RecoveryExpr {{.*}} '<dependent type>'
+ // CHECK-NEXT: `-CallExpr {{.*}} 'void'
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> (so this could be void. It will still trigger some follow-on diagnostics
> though)
As described in the previous comment, the type should always be dependent.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D89946/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D89946
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
