================
@@ -15097,15 +15102,9 @@ ExprResult
Sema::CreateOverloadedArraySubscriptExpr(SourceLocation LLoc,
ExprValueKind VK = Expr::getValueKindForType(ResultTy);
ResultTy = ResultTy.getNonLValueExprType(Context);
- CallExpr *TheCall;
- if (Method->isInstance())
- TheCall = CXXOperatorCallExpr::Create(
- Context, OO_Subscript, FnExpr.get(), MethodArgs, ResultTy, VK,
- RLoc, CurFPFeatureOverrides());
- else
- TheCall =
- CallExpr::Create(Context, FnExpr.get(), MethodArgs, ResultTy, VK,
- RLoc, CurFPFeatureOverrides());
+ CallExpr *TheCall = CXXOperatorCallExpr::Create(
----------------
zyn0217 wrote:
Thanks for the explanation! I think this is reasonable and makes it much more
intuitive for static operator call expressions. So, if I understand the change
correctly, I think we can simplify the condition testing at the clangd side: we
can avoid the check isInstance on expressions. That means, can we just reduce
the condition to IsFunctor && hasCXXExplicitFunctionObjectParameter?
I’m on my phone now, so I couldn't validate my thoughts. Could you please help
me for it? I’m willing to help you reland the patch if that works!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/68485
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
