cor3ntin wrote: > Side note: lambdas don’t suffer from this problem because they push a new > LambdaScopeInfo, so if the lambda is discarded, the ‘enclosing lambda’ (which > is just that very same lambda) is discarded along with it. I’m not sure > making blocks work the same way would work (i.e. allowing unexpanded > parameter packs if there is an enclosing lambda or block, but I’m assuming > there is a reason why we don’t support that...), because currently, e.g. this > doesn’t work at all:
I am not sure i understand that. Imo the issue is that `DiagnoseUnexpandedParameterPacks` (where we set `LambdaScopeInfo::ContainsUnexpandedParameterPack` does not account for blocks - and probably should. Ideally - DiagnoseUnexpandedParameterPacks would handle arbitrary capturing-scope thingies (statement expressions, lambdas, blocks, eventually do expressions, and other terrifying such constructs) - Once the innermost such construct is fully constructed, the `ContainsUnexpandedParameterPack` flag could bubble upward to the enclosing capturing scope https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/110762 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
