ychen added a comment. In D134507#3856956 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D134507#3856956>, @tahonermann wrote:
>> Per further discussions in D128745 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128745>, this >> is not needed. > > I agree that the code change is not needed. I think it is worth keeping the > test though (modified to verify the expected ambiguity). Agreed. It turns out the ambiguous case is already in place. (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/d8af31ecede0c54ec667ab687784149e806c9e4c/clang/test/CXX/drs/dr6xx.cpp#L1104) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D134507/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D134507 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
