llvmbot wrote:
<!--LLVM PR SUMMARY COMMENT--> @llvm/pr-subscribers-clang Author: Jorge Pinto Sousa (sousajo-cc) <details> <summary>Changes</summary> operator bool from NestedNameSpecifierLoc and member function hasQualifier both do the same thing, returning true iff the private data member Qualifier is not nullptr, so clearly one of the comments is wrong, and in this case it is the second one. --- Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90485.diff 1 Files Affected: - (modified) clang/include/clang/AST/NestedNameSpecifier.h (+1-1) ``````````diff diff --git a/clang/include/clang/AST/NestedNameSpecifier.h b/clang/include/clang/AST/NestedNameSpecifier.h index 3b6cf972118509..b4ccfa710e5166 100644 --- a/clang/include/clang/AST/NestedNameSpecifier.h +++ b/clang/include/clang/AST/NestedNameSpecifier.h @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ class NestedNameSpecifierLoc { explicit operator bool() const { return Qualifier; } /// Evaluates true when this nested-name-specifier location is - /// empty. + /// non-empty. bool hasQualifier() const { return Qualifier; } /// Retrieve the nested-name-specifier to which this instance `````````` </details> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90485 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
