tbaeder marked 3 inline comments as done.
tbaeder added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/Interp.cpp:501
} else if (FieldType->isArrayType()) {
- // FIXME: Arrays need to be handled here as well I think.
+ const ArrayType *AT = FieldType->getAsArrayTypeUnsafe();
+ assert(AT);
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > Do element qualifiers matter for checking initialization? (I don't think
> > they do, but double-checking to be sure there's not something special for
> > atomics or something like that.)
> `cast<>` already asserts if given a null pointer.
I did a quick test with `_Atomic` and that seems to work.
================
Comment at: clang/test/AST/Interp/cxx20.cpp:119
+ A a;
+ constexpr C2() {} // expected-note {{subobject of type 'int' is not
initialized}}
+ };
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> This note is kind of confusing to me. At this location, it's not a subobject
> of type `int` that matters, it's `A` that's not fully initialized, and within
> `A` the note points out which field is not initialized.
>
> I think this could get especially confusing in a case like:
> ```
> class C {
> public:
> A a;
> int b = 0;
>
> constexpr C() {}
> }
> ```
> because we'll talk about `int` not being initialized and it will look very
> much like it is.
I thought this might even be an improvement over the current situation. It's
followed by the "subobject declared here" note as well. With the current
interpreter, the output is:
```
array.cpp:95:16: error: constexpr variable 'c2' must be initialized by a
constant expression
constexpr C2 c2; // expected-error {{must be initialized by a constant
expression}} \
^~
array.cpp:95:16: note: subobject of type 'int' is not initialized
array.cpp:88:18: note: subobject declared here
struct A { int a; };
^
```
And with the new one:
```
array.cpp:95:16: error: constexpr variable 'c2' must be initialized by a
constant expression
constexpr C2 c2; // expected-error {{must be initialized by a constant
expression}} \
^~
array.cpp:93:15: note: subobject of type 'int' is not initialized
constexpr C2() {} // expected-note {{subobject of type 'int' is not
initialized}}
^
array.cpp:95:16: note: in call to 'C2()'
constexpr C2 c2; // expected-error {{must be initialized by a constant
expression}} \
^
array.cpp:88:18: note: subobject declared here
struct A { int a; };
^
```
But I dislike both very much, no idea why there's no "subobject declared here
is not initialized" diagnostic and we need two notes instead :(
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136828/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136828
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
