tbaeder added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/Interp.h:1357
+ if (InterpretBuiltin(S, PC, BID)) {
+ NewFrame.release();
+ return true;
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
> tbaeder wrote:
> > erichkeane wrote:
> > > What is going on here? Why is this not a leak?
> > The current frame is `delete`d when successfully returning the value of the
> > function, this happens in the `Ret` (and `RetVoid`) function in
> > `Interp.cpp`.
> >
> > No opinion on whether that's the best way to do it though.
> I really dont like doing it this way, I see we're doing it the same in 1366,
> but if we're expecting someone else to delete a unique-ptr, we should give
> them ownership of the whole unique-ptr. This mechanism is just obscuring the
> ownership semantics that unique_ptr is supposed to imply.
I blame @aaron.ballman :)
I'm gonna write it on my list and create a follow-up patch.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137487/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137487
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
