rmaz added a comment. In D133586#3831618 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D133586#3831618>, @vsapsai wrote:
> How correct is it to access `isConst`, `isVolatile`, `isRestrict` for > `FunctionNoProtoType`? Yes, we can provide some default value but I'm curious > if accessing that default value is correct. > > For the record, I've tried to fix the same problem in > https://reviews.llvm.org/D104963 in a different way. That was my initial solution as well, but it seemed safer to ensure these methods always returned a consistent value without auditing all the possible call sites. I agree that it doesn't seem right that these methods are on the base class at all if they are only valid in one of the subclasses. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D133586/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D133586 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
