[PATCH] D36728: Switch to consumeError(), since this can crash otherwise.

[Lang Hames via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

lhames added a comment.

> Is it ok to drop the assertion in that case (and convert it to a comment)? I didn't want to alter too much of this check, since perhaps the original author(s) were more skeptical about this breaking (hence the assertion). Something like:
> 
> // Replacements must not conflict since ranges have been merged.
>  llvm::cantFail(FakeReplaces.add(...));

Yep - cantFail asserts that the result is success, so your proposed change (with the assertion text above the call) is ideal.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D36728