cor3ntin added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp:2132-2136
+ for (Stmt *SubStmt : S->children())
+ if (SubStmt &&
+ !CheckConstexprFunctionStmt(SemaRef, Dcl, SubStmt, ReturnStmts,
+ Cxx1yLoc, Cxx2aLoc, Cxx2bLoc, Kind))
return false;
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> cor3ntin wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > >
> > This is consistent with the same code above. Should I be inconsistent?
> I don't have strong opinions, either way is defensible. I just have a hard
> time reading the code with nesting the substatements like this.
Would you be happy if i fix all of them later as a nfc?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111400/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111400
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
