aaron.ballman added a comment.
I'm a bit confused as to why this is necessary. We already have
`lambdaExpr(hasAnyCapture(varDecl(hasName("whatever"))))` and
`lambdaExpr(hasAnyCapture(cxxThisExpr()))`, so I'm not certain why we need this
as a parallel construct?
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h:4629-4630
+/// matches `[x](){}`.
+AST_MATCHER_P(LambdaCapture, refersToVarDecl, internal::Matcher<VarDecl>,
+ InnerMatcher) {
+ auto *capturedVar = Node.getCapturedVar();
----------------
The name here is a bit unclear -- whether it is the matcher matching `int x;`
or the `x` from the capture is not clear from the name. The comment suggests
it's matching `x` from the capture, but I think it's actually matching the `int
x;` variable declaration.
Being clear on what's matched here is important when we think about
initializers:
```
void foo() {
int x = 12;
auto f = [x = 100](){};
}
```
and
```
lambdaExpr(hasAnyCapture(lambdaCapture(refersToVarDecl(hasName("x"),
hasInitializer(integerLiteral(equals(100))))))
```
Would you expect this to match? (This might be a good test case to add.)
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D112491/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D112491
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
