[PATCH] Fix fallout from r219557

[Richard Smith]

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <
anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote:

> The type is definitely ignored. However, for (a ? lhs : rhs) we should
> promote both lhs and rhs to their common type, right? And currently this is
> performed inside UsualArithmeticConversions (or, actually, inside
> handleComplexFloatConversion). Should we duplicate the behavior of
> handleComplexFloatConversion inside CheckConditionalOperands ?


No. Take the result of UsualArithmeticConversions and use that as the
result of the conditional.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20141111/8e6c321c/attachment.html>