Just FYI in case others see this:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Chandler Carruth chandl...@gmail.com
wrote:
+assert(ConstructorNameSet.empty() Failed to find all of the
visible
+ constructors by walking all the
+
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk
wrote:
So, the problem seems to be that the class has implicit special members
that are not in the list of lexical declarations of the class but are in
the visible lookup results. In order for this to happen, you might need
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:15 AM, Chandler Carruth chandl...@gmail.com
wrote:
Just FYI in case others see this:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Chandler Carruth chandl...@gmail.com
wrote:
+assert(ConstructorNameSet.empty() Failed to find all of the
visible
+
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Chandler Carruth chandl...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk
wrote:
So, the problem seems to be that the class has implicit special members
that are not in the list of lexical declarations of the class but
Author: chandlerc
Date: Wed Mar 25 22:11:40 2015
New Revision: 233249
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=233249view=rev
Log:
[Modules] A second attempt at writing out on-disk hash tables for the
decl context lookup tables.
The first attepmt at this caused problems. We had significantly
