Quuxplusone added a comment.
Looks fine to me; please don't let //me// block this any further. :) Someone
else, e.g. @aaron.ballman, should be the one to accept it, though.
================
Comment at: include/clang/AST/NestedNameSpecifier.h:220
+ void print(raw_ostream &OS, const PrintingPolicy &Policy,
+ bool ResolveTemplateArguments = false) const;
----------------
Peanut gallery says: Should `ResolveTemplateArguments` really be here, or
should it be a property of the `PrintingPolicy` the same way e.g.
`ConstantsAsWritten` is a property of the `PrintingPolicy`? I don't know what
a `PrintingPolicy` is, really, but I know that I hate defaulted boolean
function parameters with a passion. ;)
Furthermore, I note that the doc-comment for `ConstantsAsWritten`, at line ~207
of include/clang/AST/PrettyPrinter.h, is nonsensical and maybe someone should
give it some love. (That is totally not //your// problem, though.)
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp:3071
+ printTemplateArgumentList(OS, IV->getTemplateArgs().asArray(), Policy);
+ }
+ return;
----------------
Checking my understanding: Am I correct that this code currently does not
pretty-print
static_assert(std::is_same<T, int>(), "");
(creating an object of the trait type and then using its constexpr `operator
bool` to convert it to bool)? This is a rare idiom and doesn't need to be
supported AFAIC.
================
Comment at: test/SemaCXX/static-assert.cpp:143
+void foo2() {
+ static_assert(::ns::NestedTemplates1<T, a>::NestedTemplates2::template
NestedTemplates3<U>::value, "message");
+ // expected-error@-1{{static_assert failed due to requirement
'::ns::NestedTemplates1<int,
3>::NestedTemplates2::NestedTemplates3<float>::value' "message"}}
----------------
Looking at this example, I thought of one more case to test.
```
static_assert(std::is_same_v<T[sizeof(T)], int[4]>, "");
```
That is, I'd like to see a test that verifies whether `T[sizeof(T)]`
pretty-prints as `float[sizeof(float)]`, or `float[4]`, or something else. (I
don't really care what it prints as, as long as it's not completely crazy, and
as long as it doesn't regress in future releases.)
================
Comment at: test/SemaCXX/static-assert.cpp:164
+ static_assert(std::is_const<typename T::iterator>::value, "message");
+ // expected-error@-1{{type 'int' cannot be used prior to '::' because it has
no members}}
+}
----------------
I guess I meant more like
```
struct S {};
void bar() {
foo(S{});
}
```
```
error: no member named 'iterator' in 'S'
static_assert(std::is_same_v<typename T::iterator, int>);
~~~^
```
but as neither version goes through your codepath anyway, what you've got is OK.
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54903/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54903
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
