================
@@ -13455,6 +13455,10 @@ bool IntExprEvaluator::VisitBuiltinCallExpr(const
CallExpr *E,
case Builtin::BI__lzcnt16: // Microsoft variants of count leading-zeroes
case Builtin::BI__lzcnt:
case Builtin::BI__lzcnt64: {
+ // TODO: Handle boolean vectors in constexpr contexts.
+ if (E->getArg(0)->getType()->isExtVectorBoolType())
+ return false;
----------------
rjmccall wrote:
Is it okay to just return false here without indicating why? The other places
nearby that return false are recursive calls, so presumably they indicate why
before returning.
Also, implementing these should be really straightforward — you just call
`EvaluateVector` into a temporary `APValue`, and if that succeeds, you know
it'll be a vector and the elements will be simple integer `APValue`s. I think
it's reasonable to just ask for it to be done in this patch.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154203
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
