Fix #63352 and one other similar issue by slightly adjusting the computation for the existance of non
trivial special member functions.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
This is a bit confusing but I think it is correct.
LGTM modulo typos.
clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst | ||
---|---|---|
70–73 |
clang/include/clang/AST/DeclCXX.h | ||
---|---|---|
1269 | These references looks like they need to be updated. Same below and it looks like hasNonTrivialCopyConstructorForCall is missing references all together. |
clang/include/clang/AST/DeclCXX.h | ||
---|---|---|
1269 | TBH I don't think those functions actually need references to the standard? Whether the actual member functions are trivial or not is already calculated before. Do you think I can just remove it? :) |
clang/include/clang/AST/DeclCXX.h | ||
---|---|---|
1269 | I think it makes sense to call out that these functions represent something from the standard. There are other functions with similar names, which don't have an equivalent in the C++ standard, like hasTrivialDestructorForCall. |
clang/include/clang/AST/DeclCXX.h | ||
---|---|---|
1269 | The point of having the reference is so folks can understand the logic behind why someone choose to implement the functionality as they did. I also prefer quoting the critical text since the paragraphs, sometimes the stable name and wording can change and at least having text can allow us to track which standard it came from and hopefully which change changed the text and understand if it effects our compliance or not. It can be a lot of work to figure this out from scratch if you don't know where to look. |
@royjacobson Are you still working on that? It seems it's only missing updates to a comment
I did not have a lot of time for Clang the last few months unfortunately. I might take a look at this again next month when I'll have a bit more time.
I, uh, got preoccupied by some recent events. Don't think I'll have the time for this unfortunately.