On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Reid Kleckner <r...@google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> > wrote: >> >> This seems like a fragile thing to rely on. What about template >> instantiation performed at end of TU? (I /think/ that case is currently >> fine because all the kinds of template we instantiate ultimately do result >> in a call to HandleTopLevelDecl or some other ASTConsumer callback, but I >> don't really like relying on that.) >> >> Could we trigger processing of any remaining deferred declarations in >> HandleTranslationUnit? >> > > We could, but we already have this assert in the destructor: > // There should normally not be any leftover inline method > definitions. > assert(DeferredInlineMethodDefinitions.empty() || > Diags.hasErrorOccurred()); > > If we ever break the invariant that HandleTopLevelDecl will be called some > time after deferring a decl, we will find out about it eventually. > OK. This seems like a fairly arbitrary thing to have in the ASTConsumer contract, but in practice it does seem like it ought to hold.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
