diff options
| author | Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk> | 2020-01-30 17:11:47 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk> | 2020-02-04 12:25:40 -0800 |
| commit | 7a94fc09d17bc317032eb9605eba05dced8c87e5 (patch) | |
| tree | df6513fb5b8d64f4340ab0f0e3c9983e420baf50 /llvm/test/CodeGen/Generic/annotate.ll | |
| parent | 300cbdc59da05756f7a0334338076124536df03d (diff) | |
| download | bcm5719-llvm-7a94fc09d17bc317032eb9605eba05dced8c87e5.tar.gz bcm5719-llvm-7a94fc09d17bc317032eb9605eba05dced8c87e5.zip | |
PR44721: Don't consider overloaded operators for built-in comparisons
when building a defaulted comparison.
As a convenient way of asking whether `x @ y` is valid and building it,
we previouly always performed overload resolution and built an
overloaded expression, which would both end up picking a builtin
operator candidate when given a non-overloadable type. But that's not
quite right, because it can result in our finding a user-declared
operator overload, which we should never do when applying operators
non-overloadable types.
Handle this more correctly: skip overload resolution when building
`x @ y` if the operands are not overloadable. But still perform overload
resolution (considering only builtin candidates) when checking validity,
as we don't have any other good way to ask whether a binary operator
expression would be valid.
(cherry picked from commit 1f3f8c369a5067a132c871f33a955a7feaea8534)
Diffstat (limited to 'llvm/test/CodeGen/Generic/annotate.ll')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions

