rjmccall added a comment. In D72841#1917340 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72841#1917340>, @mibintc wrote:
> @rjmccall Since CompoundAssignmentOperator derives from BinaryOperator, it's > not simple to add Trailing storage here. I think I will have to fold > CompoundAssignmentOperator into BinaryOperator and then add the 2 extra > fields needed by CompoundAssignmentOperator into Trailing storage. Can you > think of a better way? I worked on Trailing storage for UnaryOperator first > and that wasn't too bad, but Binary is a different story. It's something we deal with occasionally, but it's definitely annoying. You basically have to test for which concrete class you have and then ask that class for its trailing storage. Collapsing the types might be okay but could get involved. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D72841/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D72841 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
