upsj added a comment.
Your approach to handling implicit conversions is much nicer than mine, so I
abandoned my revision. There is still one case (that might even occur in the
code base I'm working on?) that this change would lead to incorrect hints on.
WDYT about keeping the other changes, but using my pack detection logic?
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/AST.cpp:790
+ // Skip functions with less parameters, they can't be the target.
+ if (Callee->parameters().size() < Parameters.size())
+ return;
----------------
This is not a sufficient check, since the other parameters need not be from an
expanded pack.
Example:
```
void foo(int a, int b);
int baz(int x, int y);
template <typename... Args>
void bar(Args... args) {
foo(baz(args, 1)...);
}
void foo() {
bar(1, 42);
}
```
Here we shouldn't print a hint at all, but we print `x:` and `y:`
The important distinction is between `Expr(args...)` and `Expr(args)...`, which
can be decided in the instantiated case by the check I implemented in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D130259 for all cases, except when `args` only
consists of a single element.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D130260/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D130260
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
