aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/TreeTransform.h:10516
TreeTransform<Derived>::TransformUserDefinedLiteral(UserDefinedLiteral *E) {
- if (FunctionDecl *FD = E->getDirectCallee())
- SemaRef.MarkFunctionReferenced(E->getBeginLoc(), FD);
- return SemaRef.MaybeBindToTemporary(E);
+ return TransformCallExpr(E);
}
----------------
cor3ntin wrote:
> erichkeane wrote:
> > I THINK you have to do this by doing `getDerived().TransformCallExpr(E)`.
> >
> Oh yes, good point
Hmmm, don't we want this level of transformation to kick in, not the derived?
e.g., another approach would be to remove the definition of this function
entirely so that the recursive AST visitor calls `TransformCallExpr()` instead?
================
Comment at: clang/test/CodeGenCXX/cxx20-consteval-crash.cpp:28
+
+namespace Issue54578 {
+inline consteval unsigned char operator""_UC(const unsigned long long n) {
----------------
cor3ntin wrote:
> I've used things like `ghXXXX` previously. for my own curiosity, is there a
> convention here?
I don't know if we've organically gotten a convention here yet or not. I've
been using `Issue` for mine, but don't have a strong preference either.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D122586/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D122586
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
