curdeius added a comment.
Thank you for the review Aaron. I hope having addressed your comments so far.
I'm not sure for the prototype scope though.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Parse/ParseExprCXX.cpp:1440
+ } else if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus2b) {
+ ParseScope PrototypeScope(this, Scope::FunctionPrototypeScope |
+ Scope::FunctionDeclarationScope |
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> I don't know the answer to this, but... do we need a prototype scope at all
> when there's no parameter list? The old code was doing this, so I don't think
> this is an issue with your patch per se, more just curiosity whether this is
> necessary in this case.
I'm not really familiar with clang (I usually work with other parts of LLVM),
but at least in the current implementation (before this patch) the prototype
scope englobes the parsing of lambda-specifiers, so I found it logical to keep
it the same way.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98433/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98433
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
