================
@@ -78,6 +78,12 @@ static bool hasOptionalClassName(const CXXRecordDecl &RD) {
isFullyQualifiedNamespaceEqualTo(*N, "folly"));
}
+ if (RD.getName() == "Optional_Base") {
----------------
BaLiKfromUA wrote:
@jvoung I had a similar idea at the moment of writing my patch.
My initial reasoning was: if we remove handling of `bsl::optional` from this
place, it might affect handling of constructors.
But now I am writing this to you and doubting it since we should handle
constructors of classes inherited from supported optionals.
I can double-check it by writing some tests but please let me know if my last
idea makes sense :)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/168863
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
