================ Comment at: lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp:4438 @@ -4432,1 +4437,3 @@ + // C++TS1 concept + case tok::kw_concept: ---------------- hubert.reinterpretcast wrote: > I'm not sure what C++TS1 is meant to refer to since the Concepts TS is not > TS1. I'll fix that. Any preference on a comment? C++14 Concepts-ts?
================ Comment at: test/Parser/cxx-concepts-value-function.cpp:1 @@ +1,2 @@ +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++14 -fconcepts-ts -x c++ -verify -DDIAG=0|1 %s + ---------------- hubert.reinterpretcast wrote: > I am not familiar with the 0|1 syntax being used here; my local copy of "lit" > interprets it as a pipe to a command "1". Perhaps this should be two run > lines? Yeah, I was trying to keep it on one line. I'll change it to two. ================ Comment at: test/Parser/cxx-concepts-value-function.cpp:4 @@ +3,3 @@ +/****************************************************************************** +* Support parsing of concept values and functions + ******************************************************************************/ ---------------- hubert.reinterpretcast wrote: > The usual way to express this is "function concepts and variable concepts". Thanks. I'll make the change for the correct verbiage. ================ Comment at: test/Parser/cxx-concepts-value-function.cpp:11 @@ +10,3 @@ + +#ifdef DIAG + ---------------- hubert.reinterpretcast wrote: > hubert.reinterpretcast wrote: > > -DDIAG=0 would still trigger the #ifdef DIAG here (which explains why the > > test file might pass with expected-no-diagnostics). > I meant //without// `expected-no-diagnostics` somewhere. Hmm, yeah, I missed that and thought it was working. Is there a better way to use/suppress the diagnostic cases? http://reviews.llvm.org/D10528 EMAIL PREFERENCES http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
