We should not be recursing over the shadow definitions in UsingDecl --

they're not something the user typed (at least, not here).

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@108212 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

diff --git a/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h b/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
index cf17f53ddca865e0b50708b999e1e03847db0ed3..0853dddbe9e5bceb9adb3856f148aaa0d68c0a92 100644 (file)
--- a/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
+++ b/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
@@ -1062,11 +1062,6 @@ DEF_TRAVERSE_DECL(ObjCPropertyDecl, {
 
 DEF_TRAVERSE_DECL(UsingDecl, {
     TRY_TO(TraverseNestedNameSpecifier(D->getTargetNestedNameDecl()));
-    // FIXME: should we be iterating over the shadows?
-    for (UsingDecl::shadow_iterator I = D->shadow_begin(), E = D->shadow_end();
-         I != E; ++I) {
-      TRY_TO(TraverseDecl(*I));
-    }
   })
 
 DEF_TRAVERSE_DECL(UsingDirectiveDecl, {