Skip to content

Target: correct binding variable type (NFC) #1446

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 14, 2020

Conversation

compnerd
Copy link
Member

The returned type for GetScratchSwiftASTContext is
llvm::Optional<SwiftASTContextReader> which cannot be unwrapped. Use
auto and a reference binding rather than the copy-constructor and
unbound type. This repairs the build with MSVC.

The returned type for `GetScratchSwiftASTContext` is
`llvm::Optional<SwiftASTContextReader>` which cannot be unwrapped.  Use
`auto` and a reference binding rather than the copy-constructor and
unbound type.  This repairs the build with MSVC.
@compnerd
Copy link
Member Author

@swift-ci please test

@compnerd
Copy link
Member Author

@compnerd
Copy link
Member Author

CC: @nate-chandler

@vedantk
Copy link

vedantk commented Jul 13, 2020

The auto-merge from swift/release/5.3 to swift/master must have caused this breakage, since 5.3 doesn't have the change to make GetScratchSwiftASTContext return an Optional. I didn't realize we had an auto-merger in this direction: I'll keep this in mind going forward. Sorry for the breakage.

@compnerd
Copy link
Member Author

@vedantk no worries - the lldb branching is pretty complicated.

@xedin
Copy link

xedin commented Jul 13, 2020

@swift-ci please test

@compnerd compnerd merged commit 5a5b279 into swiftlang:swift/master Jul 14, 2020
@compnerd compnerd deleted the binding branch July 14, 2020 02:51
@davezarzycki
Copy link

This also broke building with top-of-tree clang. Thanks for fixing this @compnerd

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants