cor3ntin added a comment.
In D139586#4000309 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D139586#4000309>,
@hubert.reinterpretcast wrote:
> At least on the surface, it looks like there will be a lot of trouble to deal
> with default arguments:
>
> struct A { A(); ~A(); int x[3]; };
> int (&f(const A & = A()))[3];
> void bar(int);
> void foo() {
> for (auto e : f()) { bar(e); }
> }
>
> We get a `CXXDefaultArgExpr`, and the expression on the parameter declaration
> is what has the `MaterializeTemporaryExpr`. It looks like we now have cases
> where different call sites require different semantics (and perhaps different
> diagnostics, somewhat like template instantiations).
This PR https://reviews.llvm.org/D136554 adds some machinery to rewrite
`CXXDefaultArgExpr` when they are used, so we could, if needed, reuse that
machinery to inject `MaterializeTemporaryExpr` (as part of D136554
<https://reviews.llvm.org/D136554> the rewrite only happen in the presence of
immediate function calls)
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D139586/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D139586
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
