shafik added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/ByteCodeExprGen.cpp:835
IsTemporary = true;
Ty = E->getType();
}
----------------
Do we really want to the type of the expression? If we have a `ValueDecl` don't
we want that type? I think they should be the same, do you have any examples
where the expression is the type we want? I am looking at the AST from ` int x
= 1+1L;`
https://godbolt.org/z/q3Tr7Kxoq
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/Descriptor.h:73
+ /// Flag indicating if the field is mutable (if in a record).
+ unsigned IsMutable : 1;
+
----------------
Maybe `IsFieldMutable` b/c we call `CreateDescriptor` it is a little confusing
why we have `IsConst` and `IsMutable`
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Interp/Pointer.h:63-64
private:
static constexpr unsigned PastEndMark = (unsigned)-1;
static constexpr unsigned RootPtrMark = (unsigned)-1;
----------------
or `-1u`
================
Comment at: clang/test/AST/Interp/cxx20.cpp:65
}
-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
+static_assert(unInitLocal() == 0, ""); // ref-error {{not an integral constant
expression}} \
+ // ref-note {{in call to
'unInitLocal()'}} \
----------------
Can we also test local arrays and classes as well?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D135750/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D135750
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
