tahonermann added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/ByteCodeExprGen.cpp:613-614
case UO_LNot: // !x
+ if (!this->Visit(SubExpr))
+ return false;
return this->emitInvBool(E);
----------------
I don't love that the `Visit()` calls are now repeated for most of the
operations, but I don't have a better suggestion. I see that `Visit()` must not
be called for ``UO_Deref` since `dereference()` will perform the visitation. I
guess that case could be pulled out of the switch, but that isn't necessarily
better. Consider this an unactionable comment.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/ByteCodeExprGen.cpp:662
+ return this->emitGetPtrParam(It->second, E);
+ }
+
----------------
Perhaps add:
else {
assert(0 && "Unhandled declaration kind");
}
================
Comment at: clang/test/AST/Interp/cxx20.cpp:2
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fexperimental-new-constant-interpreter -std=c++20 -verify
%s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -verify %s -DREFERENCE
+
----------------
Is `-DREFERENCE` needed here? I don't see `REFERENCE` referenced in the test.
From the other test, I gather that it is intended to annotate differences from
the "reference" implementation.
================
Comment at: clang/test/AST/Interp/cxx20.cpp:11
+ return *p;
+}
+
----------------
Perhaps add:
//static_assert(getMinux5() == -5, ""); TODO
================
Comment at: clang/test/AST/Interp/literals.cpp:43
+ return &m;
+}
+
----------------
Perhaps add:
//static_assert(*getIntPointer() == 10, ""); TODO
================
Comment at: clang/test/AST/Interp/literals.cpp:47
+ return k;
+}
----------------
Perhaps add:
//static_assert(gimme(5) == 5, ""); TODO
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D132111/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D132111
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
