fmayer wrote: > > > Not sure I understand your question? Which assertion? `clang.exe t.c` is > > > triggering an assertion? > > > > > > I don't understand why you say > > > The value `CX_None` is the defaut value given to the `Range` when no > > > `fcomplex-arithmetic` is used on the command lin > > > > > > but imply it does not need to be stored in the bitfield. If you patch this > > CL, and change the size for `ComplexRange` back, you will see it that it > > fails the assertion I added if you run the clang test suite. > > OK. I see the issue. Thanks. I think this should be titled [NFC][Clang] YOUR > TITLE. If you don't want to make it NFC then you need to add a LIT test :-) > Not sure you can make it fail with a LIT test.
What do you mean? Of course you can't fail the assertion now that the offending code is fixed. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126166 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
