mirror of
https://github.com/capstone-engine/llvm-capstone.git
synced 2024-11-26 23:21:11 +00:00
d8352e93c1
When analysing whether we should handle a binary expression as an overloaded operator call or a builtin operator, we were calling `checkPlaceholderForOverload()`, which takes care of any placeholders that are not overload sets—which would usually make sense since those need to be handled as part of overload resolution. Unfortunately, we were also doing that for `.*`, which is not overloadable, and then proceeding to create a builtin operator anyway, which would crash if the RHS happened to be an unresolved overload set (due hitting an assertion in `CreateBuiltinBinOp()`—specifically, in one of its callees—in the `.*` case that makes sure its arguments aren’t placeholders). This pr instead makes it so we check for *all* placeholders early if the operator is `.*`. It’s worth noting that, 1. In the `.*` case, we now additionally also check for *any* placeholders (not just non-overload-sets) in the LHS; this shouldn’t make a difference, however—at least I couldn’t think of a way to trigger the assertion with an overload set as the LHS of `.*`; it is worth noting that the assertion in question would also complain if the LHS happened to be of placeholder type, though. 2. There is another case in which we also don’t perform overload resolution—namely `=` if the LHS is not of class or enumeration type after handling non-overload-set placeholders—as in the `.*` case, but similarly to 1., I first couldn’t think of a way of getting this case to crash, and secondly, `CreateBuiltinBinOp()` doesn’t seem to care about placeholders in the LHS or RHS in the `=` case (from what I can tell, it, or rather one of its callees, only checks that the LHS is not a pseudo-object type, but those will have already been handled by the call to `checkPlaceholderForOverload()` by the time we get to this function), so I don’t think this case suffers from the same problem. This fixes #53815. --------- Co-authored-by: Aaron Ballman <aaron@aaronballman.com> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| bindings | ||
| cmake | ||
| docs | ||
| examples | ||
| include | ||
| lib | ||
| runtime | ||
| test | ||
| tools | ||
| unittests | ||
| utils | ||
| www | ||
| .clang-format | ||
| .clang-tidy | ||
| .gitignore | ||
| CMakeLists.txt | ||
| CodeOwners.rst | ||
| INSTALL.txt | ||
| LICENSE.TXT | ||
| NOTES.txt | ||
| README.txt | ||
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// // C Language Family Front-end //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// Welcome to Clang. This is a compiler front-end for the C family of languages (C, C++, Objective-C, and Objective-C++) which is built as part of the LLVM compiler infrastructure project. Unlike many other compiler frontends, Clang is useful for a number of things beyond just compiling code: we intend for Clang to be host to a number of different source-level tools. One example of this is the Clang Static Analyzer. If you're interested in more (including how to build Clang) it is best to read the relevant web sites. Here are some pointers: Information on Clang: http://clang.llvm.org/ Building and using Clang: http://clang.llvm.org/get_started.html Clang Static Analyzer: http://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/ Information on the LLVM project: http://llvm.org/ If you have questions or comments about Clang, a great place to discuss them is on the Clang forums: https://discourse.llvm.org/c/clang/ If you find a bug in Clang, please file it in the LLVM bug tracker: http://llvm.org/bugs/