Quuxplusone added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp:3089
+ else
+ OS << "(";
+ for (CXXTemporaryObjectExpr::arg_iterator Arg = Node->arg_begin(),
----------------
It might be more maintainer-proof to write this as
std::pair<const char *, const char *> Braces;
if (Node->isStdInitListInitialization())
Braces = std::make_pair("", "");
else if (Node->isListInitialization())
Braces = std::make_pair("{", "}");
else
Braces = std::make_pair("(", ")");
OS << Braces.first;
for (...) { ... }
OS << Braces.second;
return true;
================
Comment at: test/SemaCXX/static-assert.cpp:136
+static_assert(std::is_const<decltype(ExampleTypes(3))>::value, "message");
+// expected-error@-1{{static_assert failed due to requirement
'std::is_const<ExampleTypes>::value' "message"}}
----------------
Conspicuously missing any test for lines 3081–3106 above. IIUC, those lines
would trigger on things like
```
template<class T> struct X { int i=0, j=0; constexpr operator bool() const {
return false; } };
template<class T> void test() {
static_assert(X<T>{});
static_assert(X<T>{1,2});
static_assert(T{0});
static_assert(T(0));
}
template void test<int>();
```
But I guess I don't see why extra code is needed to handle those; shouldn't the
pretty-printer handle them already? What do the current diagnostics look like
for my example?
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55552/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55552
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
