shafik added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/ByteCodeExprGen.cpp:290
+ return this->emitConst(
+ E, Ctx.getASTContext().getTypeSizeInChars(ArgType).getQuantity());
+ }
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> erichkeane wrote:
> > shafik wrote:
> > > I notice that `HandleSizeof` special cases `void` and function types.
> > OOOH, DEFINITELY make sure you test function types here, and figure out how
> > HandleSizeof does it.
> >
> > BUT, I think 'void' should error/be an invalid before we get here?
> >
> > ALSO, now that I think further, I'm sure @aaron.ballman has a bunch of
> > runtime-evaluated sizeof examples to share around vlas.
> I was just about to comment about everyone's favorite horrible C++ extension.
> :-D We should make sure we properly reject code like:
> ```
> void func() {
> int n = 12;
> constexpr int oofda = sizeof(int[n++]);
> }
> ```
> while accepting code like:
> ```
> consteval int foo(int n) {
> return sizeof(int[n]);
> }
> constinit int var = foo(5);
> ```
Note, that clang currently treats that as ill-formed and there is divergence
with how gcc and clang treat the `constexpr` case as well.
So if we are going to say we want this to work then we should file a bug
against clang.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D133934/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D133934
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
