hubert.reinterpretcast added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/offsetof.cpp:106
+int x3[__builtin_offsetof(struct X2, X2::static_a) == 0 ? 1 : -1]; //
expected-error{{no member named 'static_a'}}
+int x4[__builtin_offsetof(struct X2, X2::X2) == 0 ? 1 : -1]; //
expected-error{{no member named 'X2'}}
+
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> yichi170 wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > There's one more test I'd like to see:
> > > ```
> > > struct S {
> > > int Foo;
> > > };
> > >
> > > template <typename Ty>
> > > void func() {
> > > static_assert(__builtin_offsetof(Ty, Ty::Foo) == 0, "");
> > > }
> > >
> > > void inst() {
> > > func<S>();
> > > }
> > > ```
> > It would get the compile error in the current patch, but I think it should
> > be compiled without any error, right?
> Correct, that should be accepted: https://godbolt.org/z/1f6a9Yaxa
Should expect this to pass too:
```
template <typename T>
struct Z {
static_assert(!__builtin_offsetof(T, template Q<T>::x));
};
struct A {
template <typename T> using Q = T;
int x;
};
Z<A> za;
```
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D157201/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D157201
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
