================
@@ -849,13 +849,11 @@ namespace CompoundLiterals {
}
static_assert(get5() == 5, "");
- constexpr int get6(int f = (int[]){1,2,6}[2]) { // ref-note {{subexpression
not valid in a constant expression}} \
- // ref-note {{declared here}}
+ constexpr int get6(int f = (int[]){1,2,6}[2]) {
----------------
AaronBallman wrote:
Thanks, I'll add more tests.
> `constinit int* a1 = f(); // error: pointer points to local variable`
Yes, this should fail (and it does).
> `constexpr int f2(int *x, int (*y)[*(x=(int[]){1,2,3})]) {`
You are a bad person who should feel bad. :-D I do think that should evaluate
to 1 (but only when calling `f2(0)`), but that's a pile of VLA code which we
don't always handle well, especially in C++. I think a non-VLA example that's
similar would be:
```
constexpr int f2(int *x =(int[]){1,2,3}) {
return x[0];
}
constexpr int g = f2(); // Should evaluate to 1?
static_assert(g == 1, "");
```
which does behave how you'd expect.
The VLA example says `object backing the pointer x will be destroyed at the end
of the full-expression` which may be a C++'ism not impacted by the C wording?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132097
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
