Szelethus added a comment. In D85351#2247037 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D85351#2247037>, @baloghadamsoftware wrote:
> In D85351#2215547 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D85351#2215547>, @Szelethus wrote: > >> Shouldn't we create a new test care for this, instead of expanding an >> existing one? Btw, this looks great, but I lack the confidence to accept. > > Why should we? This is just a fix for cases not covered, but it is the same > functionality (retrieving the return value under construction). I added the > missed cases to the test of this exact functionality. I think its a bad experience if you break something while developing. Instead of getting a test failure for "delegating constructor initializers", you'll have to deal with a test that handles a variety of things at once, and are forced to tease it apart to find what just broke. When the introduced assert fires, this wouldn't be an issue, but in any non-crashing case it might be. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85351/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85351 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
