search for: r326110

Hello, May I ask anyone responsible to either fix or revert r326109 and r326110, which effectively broke LLVM compilation with clang? Str is const now (https://reviews.llvm.org/D43436#C985082NL45 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D43436#C985082NL45>), and later on a move constructor on const is performed (https://reviews.llvm.org/D43436#C985082NL64 <https://reviews.llvm.org/...

...pecific? What version of clang are you using to build LLVM? And what exactly is the error that you’re seeing? > On Mar 28, 2018, at 23:38, vit9696 via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello, > > May I ask anyone responsible to either fix or revert r326109 and r326110, which effectively broke LLVM compilation with clang? > > Str is const now (https://reviews.llvm.org/D43436#C985082NL45 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D43436#C985082NL45>), and later on a move constructor on const is performed (https://reviews.llvm.org/D43436#C985082NL64 <https://reviews...

...hat you’re seeing? >> >>> On Mar 28, 2018, at 23:38, vit9696 via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> May I ask anyone responsible to either fix or revert r326109 and r326110, which effectively broke LLVM compilation with clang? >>> >>> Str is const now (https://reviews.llvm.org/D43436#C985082NL45 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D43436#C985082NL45>), and later on a move constructor on const is performed (https://reviews.llvm.org/D43436#C985082NL64 &lt...