Author: Timm Bäder Date: 2022-10-14T13:31:52+02:00 New Revision: 0e6901421247b1c7ce0a2e925666d5314a34fffa
URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/0e6901421247b1c7ce0a2e925666d5314a34fffa DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/0e6901421247b1c7ce0a2e925666d5314a34fffa.diff LOG: [clang][Interp][NFC] Add a failing test case Added: Modified: clang/test/AST/Interp/cxx20.cpp Removed: ################################################################################ diff --git a/clang/test/AST/Interp/cxx20.cpp b/clang/test/AST/Interp/cxx20.cpp index e088f6bafb7e..1b1a613b34b6 100644 --- a/clang/test/AST/Interp/cxx20.cpp +++ b/clang/test/AST/Interp/cxx20.cpp @@ -60,3 +60,21 @@ constexpr int unInitLocal() { static_assert(unInitLocal() == 0, ""); // expected-error {{not an integral constant expression}} \ // ref-error {{not an integral constant expression}} \ // ref-note {{in call to 'unInitLocal()'}} + +/// TODO: The example above is correctly rejected by the new constexpr +/// interpreter, but for the wrong reasons. We don't reject it because +/// it is an uninitialized read, we reject it simply because +/// the local variable does not have an initializer. +/// +/// The code below should be accepted but is also being rejected +/// right now. +#if 0 +constexpr int initializedLocal() { + int a; + int b; + + a = 20; + return a; +} +static_assert(initializedLocal() == 20); +#endif _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
