aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/ByteCodeEmitter.cpp:30 if (!FuncDecl->isDefined(FuncDecl) || - (!FuncDecl->hasBody() && FuncDecl->willHaveBody())) - return nullptr; + (FuncDecl->hasBody() && FuncDecl->willHaveBody())) + HasBody = false; ---------------- tbaeder wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > `hasBody()` returns `true` if any body in the redeclaration chain already > > has a body, so I'm surprised to see this change -- I don't know if we reset > > `willHaveBody()` when we give the function a body, but the logic here seems > > wrong to me. > I was confused by your question, but it's just about `hasBody()` vs > `!hasBody()`, right? The old code used a negation and of course that way it > makes sense, at least the way I read it. Yes I forgot the negation. :) Heh, you managed to decipher my word salad correctly -- I was tying to figure out if you dropped the `!` for a reason. :-D CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D136936/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D136936 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
