tra added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/SemaCUDA/amdgpu-windows-vectorcall.cu:3
+
+// expected-no-diagnostics
+template<class _Ty>
----------------
tra wrote:
> It may be good to add a check where we *would* expect to see the diagnostics.
> It may be good to add a check where we *would* expect to see the diagnostics.
Scratch that. Wrong calling convention attribute will be ignored.
================
Comment at: test/SemaCUDA/amdgpu-windows-vectorcall.cu:9-10
+
+template<class _Ret, class _Arg0, class _Types> struct A<_Ret (__cdecl
_Arg0::*)(_Types) > { };
+template<class _Ret, class _Arg0, class _Types> struct A<_Ret (__vectorcall
_Arg0::*)(_Types) > {};
+
----------------
I don't think we need templates here. We're only making sure that the function
attributes are handled correctly.
Can we get by with a regular function declaration or definition?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D57716/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D57716
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
