steakhal wrote: > @haoNoQ @steakhal can you review this.
Hi, I think you forgot to address existing reviewer suggestions before asking for a second round of review. > [...] (@steakhal's version because it may actually be correct, plus check for > the attribute on the method itself.) But looks like there's some interesting > follow-up work here. And it's probably a good idea to add those tests anyway, > even if we aren't immediately fixing them, just to have a rough idea how much > we're missing. I think you in particular lack proper test coverage. Namely, the interaction with nested calls from a destructor. I could elaborate with specific examples, but I think you should do your work. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/178654 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
