erichkeane added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticASTKinds.td:370
+def note_constexpr_unscoped_enum_out_of_range : Note<
+ "store of value outside of the range of unscoped enum, valid values %0 to
%1">;
def err_experimental_clang_interp_failed : Error<
----------------
This is a bit awkwardly phrased to me... though I don't have a better idea.
Perhaps take another run, or get Aaron to look at it?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/ExprConstant.cpp:13512
+ if (Info.Ctx.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus20)
+ if (const EnumType *ET = dyn_cast<EnumType>(DestType)) {
----------------
Why the check for C++20? This is UB as a Defect Report, which applies to all
versions of C++.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/ExprConstant.cpp:13533
+
+ if (NumNegativeBits) {
+ unsigned NumBits = std::max(NumNegativeBits, NumPositiveBits + 1);
----------------
So my reading of 'within the range of the enumeration values' is different
here. Given:
`enum F { -4, 4};`, the valid values for assignment I would say are -4, -3, -2,
-1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. This error seems to be a bit more permissive here by making
sure it is represent-able by the number of bits required to represent the enum.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx2a.cpp:1477
+
+enum E { e1=-4, e2=4};
+void testValueInRangeOfEnumerationValues() {
----------------
Theres likely quite a few more tests that need to be done. We should have one
where it validates against a fixed underlying type, AND probably a pair of ones
to check against scoped enums.
I wouldn't expect a scoped enum to diagnose, but a test to make sure we're
checking the right thing is likely valuable.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D130058/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D130058
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
