zyn0217 wrote: > It turns out we do not track partially substituted pack indexing > type/expression well enough to implement the mangling for these things > correctly. (and I think we might hit further issues because, generally > speaking, diverging mangling for partially substituted thing is not a new > problem, see for example #26427) > > I'd like to merge what we have (fully substituted packs are a lot more > common), and see what we can do in subsequent PRs. does that seem reasonable > to you?
I'm not opposed to merging it as-is once the CI passes. Having an implementation is always better than nothing https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123513 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
