Mordante added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
libcxx/test/std/utilities/meta/meta.const.eval/is_constant_evaluated.verify.cpp:27
static_assert(!std::is_constant_evaluated(), "");
- // expected-warning@-1 0-1 {{'std::is_constant_evaluated' will always
evaluate to 'true' in a manifestly constant-evaluated expression}}
+ // expected-warning@-1 0-1 {{'std::is_constant_evaluated' will always
evaluate to true in this context}}
#endif
----------------
hazohelet wrote:
> philnik wrote:
> > Mordante wrote:
> > > Since libc++ support the latest ToT Clang and the last two official
> > > releases this wont work. The `expected-warning` needs to be a
> > > `expected-warning-re` that works for both the new and old diagnostic
> > You can also just shorten it to `'std::is_constant_evaluated' will always
> > evaluate to`. Seems good enough to me.
> Thanks!
I really would like a regex. To me the current message misses an important
piece of information; the `true` part. I care less about the rest of the
message, but stripping the `true` means a warning like
`std::is_constant_evaluated' will always evaluate to FALSE` would be valid too.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D155064/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D155064
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
