On Feb 18, 2009, at 7:41 PM, Eli Friedman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Mike Stump <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Feb 18, 2009, at 7:12 PM, Eli Friedman wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Mike Stump <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> --- cfe/trunk/lib/AST/ExprConstant.cpp (original)
>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/AST/ExprConstant.cpp Wed Feb 18 19:01:04 2009
>>>> @@ -260,6 +260,7 @@
>>>> APValue VisitAddrLabelExpr(AddrLabelExpr *E)
>>>>    { return APValue(E, 0); }
>>>> APValue VisitCallExpr(CallExpr *E);
>>>> +  APValue VisitBlockExpr(BlockExpr *E) { return APValue(E, 0); }
>>>
>>> Aren't there some missing checks here?
>>
>> Work in progress.  There is all sorts of checking, semantics and  
>> codegen
>> missing.
>
> That's fine, but it would be nice to at least put in a FIXME for the
> missing checks.

[ pause ] Ok, added enough code to add the check.

> This initializer for y must be illegal because it can't be evaluated
> at compile-time: the returned value changes!  Therefore, blocks aren't
> constant in the general case.

Yes, I know that, but, spending time adding the check was time taken  
away from actually working on BlockDeclRefExprs.  :-(
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to