v.g.vassilev added inline comments.
> rsmith wrote in SemaTemplate.cpp:509 > This function still appears to be able to return true (indicating to the > caller that a diagnostic was produced) without actually producing a > diagnostic. Is it better now? > rsmith wrote in SemaTemplate.cpp:505 > Why do we not issue a diagnostic in this case for a `VarDecl` when `Complain` > is true and no definition is available? It seems like we should either be > diagnosing this or asserting that it can't happen. I believe it is not implemented, i.e. we didn't have this diagnostics when `VarDecl::getInstantiatedFromStaticDataMember` is true. I added a FIXME: for a future enhancement. > rsmith wrote in ASTWriterDecl.cpp:896-897 > Sink this flag into the "not for `ParmVarDecl`" block below. I thought we might need this for c-style `void f(struct S arg)`-like constructs where we might need to demote if we merge ParmVarDecls. > rsmith wrote in ASTWriterDecl.cpp:1965 > Hmm. The width of the `InitStyle` field is definitely wrong right now, but > should be fixed separately from this change. It looks like we don't hit this > today because we don't use this abbreviation for a variable with an > initializer. In addition to fixing the width of this field, we should also > remove the `getInit() == nullptr` check when selecting the abbreviation in > `ASTDeclWriter::VisitVarDecl`. Committed in r283444. https://reviews.llvm.org/D24508 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
