yaxunl marked 2 inline comments as done.
yaxunl added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/SemaCUDA/constexpr-ctor.cu:14-27
+template <class T> struct B {
+ T a;
+ constexpr B() = default;
+};
+
+template <class T> struct C {
+ T a;
----------------
tra wrote:
> yaxunl wrote:
> > tra wrote:
> > > Do we really need three identical templates? If they are needed to let
> > > compiler emit multiple diagnostics, perhaps we could just add another
> > > template parameter so we can get different instantiations.
> > the error is emitted on the default ctor of the template. If we do not use
> > different templates, all errors are emitted on the same line, we cannot
> > make sure some instantiations do not cause error and some instantiations
> > should cause error.
> >
> > Adding template parameter will not help, because the error will still be
> > emitted to the same line.
> Having multiple errors attributed to the same source is OK. You can specify
> expected count. E.g.
> `dev-error 2 {{something}}`. Single template appears to be sufficient
> (https://godbolt.org/z/G3WvYD).
>
> You'll have different note diags emitted for individual errors, so checking
> them would both provide more info about that exactly the problem is and will
> verify that they are reported in the correct locations. Right now you are
> describing what/where triggers an error that as a comment. Letting compiler
> verify that instead would be better, IMO.
>
>
Yes I can use note. will do.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68753/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68753
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
