aaron.ballman added a comment. In D112453#3084394 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D112453#3084394>, @courbet wrote:
> As per the comment in BuiltinTypes.def (see below), `Dependent` is > allowed in context where the type is deducible, but is there any reason > **not** to deduce the type if we can do it cheaply in some cases ? > > // This represents the type of an expression whose type is > // totally unknown, e.g. 'T::foo'. It is permitted for this to > // appear in situations where the structure of the type is > // theoretically deducible. > BUILTIN_TYPE(Dependent, DependentTy) I've been trying to think if this will cause problems or not, and I'm not convinced one way or the other. I was thinking that if we resolve the type to a non-dependent type, but it is used within another type (making the second type also dependent), won't we change the point of instantiation for that second dependent type? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D112453/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D112453 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
