================
@@ -701,3 +701,45 @@ Ref<RefCountable>
[[clang::annotate_type("webkit.nodelete")]] returnTypedefPrval
} // namespace returned_prvalue_typedef
+namespace create_with_default_constructor {
+
+ struct ObjectWithDefaultConstructorWithoutMemberVariables {
+ void ref() const;
+ void deref() const;
+
+ static auto [[clang::annotate_type("webkit.nodelete")]] create() {
+ return adoptRef(*new
ObjectWithDefaultConstructorWithoutMemberVariables());
+ }
+ };
+
+ struct ObjectWithDefaultConstructorWithPODMemberVariables {
+ void ref() const;
+ void deref() const;
+
+ static auto [[clang::annotate_type("webkit.nodelete")]] create() {
+ return adoptRef(*new
ObjectWithDefaultConstructorWithPODMemberVariables());
+ }
+
+ private:
+ int value { 0 };
+ RefCountable* ptr { nullptr };
+ };
+
+ struct ObjectWithOpaqueCtor {
+ ObjectWithOpaqueCtor();
+ };
+
+ struct ObjectWithDefaultConstructorWithOpaqueCtorMemberVariables {
+ void ref() const;
+ void deref() const;
+
+ static auto [[clang::annotate_type("webkit.nodelete")]] create() {
+ return adoptRef(*new
ObjectWithDefaultConstructorWithOpaqueCtorMemberVariables());
+ // expected-warning@-1{{A function 'create' has
[[clang::annotate_type("webkit.nodelete")]] but it contains code that could
destruct an object}}
+ }
+
+ private:
+ ObjectWithOpaqueCtor obj;
+ };
+
+} // namespace create_with_default_constructor
----------------
steakhal wrote:
This can't be correct: triviality implies that it has a body.
Consequently, the return statement is/should be dead code.
Aside from that, why would we differentiate on isDefaultConstructor.
Fundamentally that is not what matters here.
Why do you think a constructor has anything to do with this FP?
To me, if anything, then the dtor could play a part here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/201544
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
