tbaeder marked 3 inline comments as done.
tbaeder added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/ByteCodeStmtGen.cpp:324-328
+ LocalScope<Emitter> Scope(this);
+ if (!this->visitUnscopedCompoundStmt(Body))
return false;
+
+ Scope.emitDestructors();
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> tbaeder wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > `AutoScope` and some curly braces to delimit the scope object lifetime?
> > The problem is that we want to emit the destructors before the jump, but
> > not destroy the scope. That should happen after the end label, when the
> > loop is finished altogether so an `AutoScope` doesn't work.
> Ahh yeah, that's a good point... but this still worries me a bit because of
> how easy it is to misuse the scope after emitting the destructors.
> Notionally, we want two scopes, right? One scope for the loop construct guts
> and a second (inner) scope for the loop body. That's how the construct is
> modeled in the standard: http://eel.is/c++draft/stmt.while#2
Add a `DestructorScope` that just emits the destructors of a given scope.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D145545/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D145545
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
