jansvoboda11 added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp:3096 + + return Success; } ---------------- dexonsmith wrote: > Would this avoid the changes above? > ``` > return Success && !Diags.hasErrorOccurred(); > ``` > ? > > Alternatively, might it be cleaner to shove the `Success = false` into a > helper lambda or something? > I've implemented something similar in my latest update. I think it works out pretty well, thanks for the suggestion. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D95792/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D95792 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
