lebedev.ri added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:12093
+ break;
+ }
+
----------------
rjmccall wrote:
> lebedev.ri wrote:
> > rjmccall wrote:
> > > I think doing this here can result in double-warning if the overload
> > > resolves to a builtin operator. Now, it might not actually be possible
> > > for that to combine with the requirements for self-assignment, but still,
> > > I think the right place to diagnose this for C++ is the same place we
> > > call DiagnoseSelfMove in CreateOverloadedBinOp.
> > >
> > > Can CheckIdentityFieldAssignment just be integrated with
> > > DiagnoseSelfAssignment so that callers don't need to do call both?
> > > I think the right place to diagnose this for C++ is the same place we
> > > call DiagnoseSelfMove in CreateOverloadedBinOp.
> >
> > ```
> > switch (Opc) {
> > case BO_Assign:
> > case BO_DivAssign:
> > case BO_SubAssign:
> > case BO_AndAssign:
> > case BO_OrAssign:
> > case BO_XorAssign:
> > DiagnoseSelfAssignment(Args[0], Args[1], OpLoc);
> > CheckIdentityFieldAssignment(Args[0], Args[1], OpLoc);
> > break;
> > default:
> > break;
> > }
> >
> > // Check for a self move.
> > if (Op == OO_Equal)
> > DiagnoseSelfMove(Args[0], Args[1], OpLoc);
> > ```
> >
> >
> > ^ That does not appear to work. Pretty much all these tests start to fail.
> >
> Okay. It's possible that my suggestion is wrong. Can you explain more how
> they fail?
Right, i should have been verbose :)
There are no test changes as compared to the current diff.
Here is the output of `$ ninja check-clang-sema check-clang-semacxx`
{F5920055}
It is also totally possible that i'm missing something obvious on my end...
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44883
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
