owenca wrote: > But even though `and` is apparently just the same as `&&` I still think we > should just annotate it as `BinaryOperator`, as this is the only sane usage.
It seems that `and` (and `bitand`) was added in C++98 for keyboards and character sets that lacked `&`, so it should be annotated exactly like `&&`. Besides, this patch still leaves the `&&` in `foo ? a < b && c : bar;` annotated incorrectly. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/199112 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
