This repository was archived by the owner on Oct 4, 2025. It is now read-only.
First try of removing failed decls, not working at all #265
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a first try of removing failed decls, but its not working at all. The cases that I thought would be working weren't since no error was emitted...
After a Decl of a Function was removed they still dangle arround in the Lookup tables (so lookup_name will return an invalid decl). Additionally I probably need to remove them from their Scope. To do this correctly we need something like a DeclRemovalVisitor, which would become very similar to how cling does its Transaction rewind stuff (https://github.com/vgvassilev/cling/blob/master/lib/Interpreter/TransactionUnloader.cpp). It's probably possible to adopt a lot of their code by just stripping out the Transaction stuff (which might not be a good idea since their code might not be totally stable yet and we might want transaction rewinding at a later point).