ABataev added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaExprMember.cpp:1873-1877 + if (auto *PrivateCopy = + isOpenMPFDCaptureDecl(Field, Base.get(), IsArrow, OpLoc, &SS, + /*TemplateKWLoc=*/SourceLocation(), Field, + FoundDecl, /*HadMultipleCandidates=*/false, + MemberNameInfo, MemberType, VK, OK)) ---------------- jyu2 wrote: > ABataev wrote: > > Why do we need this function? Implicit private rule should apply (if > > should) only to this-Юашдув kind of expressions, if something like > > parent.field expression is used, parent should be private, not > > private.field. Or I'm missing something? > You are right for "parent.a" only privatize "parent". > > But if 'a' is a field access in a member function then 'a' is privatized, not > "this". It is same with firstprivate(a). But for the explicit > firstprivate(a), the capture is build in ActOnOpenMPFirstprivateClause, so it > can be mapped to reference in the omp region. For Implicit, I need to build > capture for the first reference in the omp region with defalut(first|private) > is used. And used that to generate firstprivate clause at end when the call > to ActOnOpenMPFirstprivateClause when generating implicit clause. > > Is this reasonable? But you don't need all this info to build the capture. I think you can reuse existing isOpenMPCapturedDecl function without adding this extra isOpenMPFDCaptureDecl. Most probably, you don't need Base and all other stuff to build this->fd member expression. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D127803/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D127803 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
