Michael137 wrote: > > > > Actually, @mizvekov, can we make the > > > > `ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl::ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl(ASTContext > > > > &C, Kind DK)` constructor default initialize the `StrictPackMatch` > > > > member to false? In that case users of `CreateDeserialized` wouldn't > > > > need to worry about it being potentially uninitialized? Otherwise we'll > > > > have to expose a setter and call it from LLDB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the ASTReader, we don't need a setter because it's friends with the > > > class. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd worry a little bit about leaving it always set to a fixed value, this > > > could be a hard to track bug in the future for the lldb folks, even if > > > it's probably not observable right now. > > > > > > Yea that's fair. Would you prefer us adding a setter for it then? And set > > it to a fixed value from LLDB (until we have a better way to deal with it)? > > Sure, a setter is fine for me. I am not sure from what data you are > populating the decl, but if it's like the ast import case, you can forward > the flag from the original decl. > > If it's being formed from matching as-written template arguments, you can > forward the result from CheckTemplateArgument. > > Otherwise if it's fully synthetic, I guess you can leave a comment explaining > it.
Yea we're creating it from debug-info. Haven't thought about whether we can infer this field from debug-info, but either way, I'll go the setter approach then, thanks! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125791 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
