On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Kaelyn Takata <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, the patch seems reasonable. I take it just defining the move > constructor and assignment operator as default (e.g. > "TypoExprState(TypoExprState&& other) = default;" isn't sufficient to make > MSVC happy?
default? "undeclared identifier" :) I've committed my patch in r220723. > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Hans Wennborg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Kaelyn Takata <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Author: rikka >> > Date: Mon Oct 27 13:07:37 2014 >> > New Revision: 220695 >> > >> > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=220695&view=rev >> > Log: >> > Start adding the infrastructure for handling TypoExprs. >> >> The Windows bots are confused about this, e.g.: >> >> http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/ninja-clang-i686-msc17-R/builds/11221/steps/build_clang_tools/logs/stdio >> >> [...] >> >> > + struct TypoExprState { >> > + std::unique_ptr<TypoCorrectionConsumer> Consumer; >> >> It seems MSVC is trying to synthesize a copy constructor for this, >> which tries to copy the unique_ptr member and fails. When this comes >> up it's usually because the object is being moved and MSVC doesn't >> realize it should synthesize a move constructor. >> >> One way to fix this is to define the move constructor and assignment >> operator ourselves. Does the attached patch look reasonable? _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
