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.

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions