hokein added a comment. In D103825#2805760 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D103825#2805760>, @adamcz wrote:
> FYI The ArgTy.isNull() check is sufficient to fix this. The > Arg->containsErrors() is not - it's false in this case, since it seems > CXXDefaultArgExpr with RecoveryExpr inside seems to not contains errors, > according to containsError(). I can't tell if that's by design, or a bug. > > Haojian, please let me know if you think Arg->containsError() should be true > or if we should be testing somewhere else, or just drop it and accept that > CheckArgAlignment may be called with RecoveryExpr and have it check for > ArgTy->isNull(). > > Basically, let me know what you think about this. Thanks! Thanks for the analysis. Yeah, I think this is a bug in clang when computing the dependence <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/AST/ExprCXX.h#L1260> of CXXDefaultArgExpr -- the CXXDefaultArgExpr should respect the dependence of its actual argument (`getExpr()`). I think we should fix it first. Regarding to test it, the best way is to dump the AST node and verify the containsError is in the dump string. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D103825/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D103825 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
