hubert.reinterpretcast added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx2b.cpp:101
+
+ auto b = [](int n) constexpr {
+ if (!n)
----------------
I think a lambda marked `constexpr` and one that isn't has fundamental
differences in behaviour in relation to this patch. As noted in previous
comments, the `constexpr` case warns and then allows the lambda to be called in
constant evaluation. The other case produces no message for the lambda
definition itself and does not allow the lambda to be called in a `constexpr`
context (even if the control flow is accepted by C++2b).
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111400/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111400
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
