RKSimon added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaOverload.cpp:9528
QualType T2 = NextParam(F2, I2, I == 0);
- if (!T1.isNull() && !T1.isNull() && !Context.hasSameUnqualifiedType(T1,
T2))
+ if (!T1.isNull() && !T2.isNull() && !Context.hasSameUnqualifiedType(T1,
T2))
return false;
----------------
urnathan wrote:
> RKSimon wrote:
> > @rsmith Can these isNull checks ever fail? Or would we be better off
> > changing them into an assert?
> > ```
> > QualType T1 = NextParam(F1, I1, I == 0);
> > QualType T2 = NextParam(F2, I2, I == 0);
> > assert(!T1.isNull() && !T2.isNull() && "Unknown types");
> > if (!Context.hasSameUnqualifiedType(T1, T2))
> > ```
> that it's never ICED without checking T2's nullness suggests to me that
> they're never null. A null type here would seem to be from bad parsing, in
> which case why are we even checking further? IMHO assert now, there's plenty
> of time before C14 to revert that.
OK - I'll change this to an assertion
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D107347/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D107347
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
