================
@@ -27,8 +27,10 @@ ExprDependence clang::computeDependence(FullExpr *E) {
ExprDependence clang::computeDependence(OpaqueValueExpr *E) {
auto D = toExprDependenceForImpliedType(E->getType()->getDependence());
+ // An OpaqueValueExpr has no syntactic children, so it does not contain an
+ // unexpanded pack even if its source does.
if (auto *S = E->getSourceExpr())
- D |= S->getDependence();
+ D |= S->getDependence() & ~ExprDependence::UnexpandedPack;
assert(!(D & ExprDependence::UnexpandedPack));
----------------
zyn0217 wrote:
I'm thinking about if it's an overkill (or inappropriate?) to model those with
OpaqueValueExpr.
OpaqueValueExprs are never transformed in instantiation, and removing that
assertion (or whatever bypasses that) might leave us some bugs hidden in
future...
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/237969
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
