30 nov 2009 kl. 15.26 skrev Mike Stump:
> On Nov 30, 2009, at 11:43 AM, Anders Carlsson wrote:
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- cfe/trunk/lib/CodeGen/CGVtable.cpp (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/CodeGen/CGVtable.cpp Mon Nov 30 13:43:26 2009
>> @@ -867,8 +867,8 @@
>> const CXXRecordDecl *PrimaryBase = Layout.getPrimaryBase();
>>
>> if (PrimaryBase) {
>> - assert(PrimaryBase->isCanonicalDecl() &&
>> - "Should have the canonical decl of the primary base!");
>> + assert(PrimaryBase->isDefinition() &&
>> + "Should have the definition decl of the primary base!");
>
> The mental model I was using was that we are playing with canonical types
> through this entire file. The assert was to ensure that was true. By
> stepping back to a non-canonical type, I fear we'll just discover much later
> on we're in the weeds when something went wrong. I think I'd rather have a
> switch to the canonical type, or change the primary to be canonical during
> record layout.
I added that assert a couple of days ago :) While I do agree that it's best to
try to work with canonical types and decls, the problem is that a canonical
CXXRecordDecl might not have the definition:
class A;
class A { virtual void f(); };
and in this case it's probably best to operate on the definition decls.
Anders
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
