steveire abandoned this revision. steveire added a comment. In D96142#2564265 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96142#2564265>, @njames93 wrote:
> In D96142#2547418 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96142#2547418>, @steveire wrote: > >> In D96142#2545078 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96142#2545078>, @njames93 wrote: >> >>> I'm not sure about this. The warning is good and addresses a real problem. >> >> Well, I've made the diagnostic better anyway. > > I'm not sure its an improvement. If the template is never instantiated with > something that would trigger this, we shouldn't really warn on it. > There are plenty of times when certain template definitions will error if > certain template parameters are passed to them. > This is well defined and no compiler will ever warn on those situations. Yes, fair point. I still don't think the existing diagnostic is valuable, but removing the diagnostic would be the inevitable result of a change like this. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D96142/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D96142 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
