cjdb added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/type-traits.cpp:764 + int t30[F(__is_bounded_array(void*))]; + int t31[F(__is_bounded_array(cvoid*))]; +} ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > cjdb wrote: > > aaron.ballman wrote: > > > Any reason there's not a test with something like `int[10]` and `int[]`? > > > (Same below.) > > Those are `IntAr` and `IntArNB` at the very top. I can rename those if > > you'd like. > Oh, yeah, I totally missed that, thank you! > > Up to you on the rename, so long as we have the coverage, that's the crucial > bit. Would you be against a patch where I found and replaced **all** `TypeAr` with `Type[2]` and `TypeArNB` with `Type[]`? I've done several double takes myself and question the readability of `TypeAr`. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D116280/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D116280 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
