rsmith added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:420 + auto *FD = IFD ? IFD->getAnonField() : dyn_cast<FieldDecl>(D); + if (!FD || (FD->isUnnamedBitfield() || FD->isAnonymousStructOrUnion())) + continue; ---------------- rsmith wrote: > erichkeane wrote: > > rsmith wrote: > > > erichkeane wrote: > > > > Losing the unnamed bitfield is unfortunate, and I the 'dump struct' > > > > handles. As is losing the anonymous struct/union. > > > > > > > > Also, how does this handle 'record type' members? Does the user have > > > > to know the inner type already? If they already know that much > > > > information about the type, they wouldn't really need this, right? > > > If `__builtin_dump_struct` includes unnamed bitfields, that's a bug in > > > that builtin. > > > > > > In general, the user function gets given the bases and members with the > > > right types, so they can use an overload set or a template to dispatch > > > based on that type. See the SemaCXX test for a basic example of that. > > I thought it did? For the use case I see `__builtin_dump_struct` having, I > > would think printing the existence of unnamed bitfields to be quite useful. > > > > > Why? They're not part of the value, they're just padding. Looks like `__builtin_dump_struct` currently includes them *and* prints a value (whatever garbage happens to be in those padding bits). That's obviously a bug. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D124221/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D124221 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
