[cfe-commits] [Patch][Review Request]Fix for PR7287

Jim Goodnow II jim at thegoodnows.net
Mon Nov 1 15:32:24 PDT 2010

At 03:25 PM 11/1/2010, Ted Kremenek wrote:

>On Nov 1, 2010, at 2:45 PM, Jim Goodnow II wrote:
> > Well, those calls would actually be MemberCallExpr's, so it wouldn't
> > occur in VisitCallExpr. The problem is really just an artifact of
> > CXXOperatorCalls being grouped together with Calls. Eventually, they
> > will probably be separated and this check can go away.
>Hi Jim,
>Why don't we do the right fix now?  (i.e., do the refactoring you 
>are suggesting).

Well, Doug has a point. I hadn't seen that syntax before, but it does 
come through as a CallExpr and needs to be handled properly. My 
revised patch handles it. I'll look at the refactor as well.

  - jim

More information about the cfe-commits mailing list