================
@@ -1018,9 +1019,9 @@ namespace cwg62 { // cwg62: 2.9
struct A {
struct { int n; } b;
};
- template<typename T> struct X {};
- template<typename T> T get() { return get<T>(); }
- template<typename T> int take(T) { return 0; }
+ template<typename T> struct X {}; // cxx98-note 6{{template parameter is
declared here}}
----------------
mizvekov wrote:
Why though? These notes are not particularly relevant for a DR test.
This makes these tests very cumbersome to update.
I don't quite understand all these special rules for these DR tests, as I think
they popped up while I was on a break from the project, and I probably missed
discussions here.
But this goes around the design intent of the diagnostic verifier, which
encourages these sorts of matches, while at the same time does not support
matching on a diagnostic sequence at all, while this can give the people
illusion that this is actually verified.
I think this makes the verifier unsuited for this kind of test. FileCheck on
the raw clang output and a generator/updater script would be a superior
solution, which would actually support matching on a sequence of diagnostics.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126088
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
