This is not a new semantic feature. The syntax `(? 1, 2, 3)` was
disallowed by the parser in a dag //expression//, but there were
already ways to sneak a `?` into the operator field of a dag
//value//, e.g. by initializing it from a class template parameter
which is then set to `?` by the instantiating `def`.
This patch makes `?` in the operator slot syntactically legal, so it's
now easy to construct dags with an unset operator. Also, the semantics
of `!con` are relaxed so that it will allow a combination of set and
unset operator fields in the dag nodes it's concatenating, with the
restriction that all the operators that are //not// unset still have
to agree with each other.
Reviewers: hfinkel, nhaehnle
Reviewed By: hfinkel, nhaehnle
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71195
