[PATCH] D149718: [NFC][Clang] Fix Coverity issues of copy without assign

[Tom Honermann via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

tahonermann accepted this revision.
tahonermann added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

Looks good. Thanks @Manna!



================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Sema/Sema.h:1786
     SemaDiagnosticBuilder(SemaDiagnosticBuilder &&D);
+    SemaDiagnosticBuilder &operator=(SemaDiagnosticBuilder &&D);
     SemaDiagnosticBuilder(const SemaDiagnosticBuilder &) = default;
----------------
Manna wrote:
> tahonermann wrote:
> > Manna wrote:
> > > tahonermann wrote:
> > > > Since this class declares a move constructor, the declaration of the implicit move assignment operator is inhibited and the implicitly declared assignment operator is defined as deleted. This change declares a move assignment operator but doesn't define it (perhaps `= delete` was intended?). If support for assignment is not desired, then I think a declaration of a deleted copy assignment operator is all that is needed (matching the change made for `Strategy` below). Otherwise, I think a defaulted copy assignment operator should be declared and a move assignment operator should be defined that implements the same behavior as the move constructor.
> > > Thanks @tahonermann for the comments. 
> > > 
> > > >> think a defaulted copy assignment operator should be declared and a move assignment operator should be defined that implements the same behavior as the move constructor.
> > > 
> > > I have updated patch based on further analysis and my understanding. This seems reasonable to me.
> > This change still declares a move assignment operator, but doesn't provide a definition. The move constructor is implemented in `clang/lib/Sema/Sema.cpp`, so I would expect to see the move assignment operator definition provided there as well.
> Thanks @tahonermann for the comments. I have removed `Sema.h`  change from the current patch. I will address it in a separate review pull request. Need to look into this more.  
Ok, sounds good.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D149718/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D149718