cjdb added a comment. In D146358#4229120 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D146358#4229120>, @hazohelet wrote:
> In D146358#4227938 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D146358#4227938>, @cjdb wrote: > >> In D146358#4204412 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D146358#4204412>, @tbaeder >> wrote: >> >>> "subobject named 'foo'" sounds a bit weird to me, I'd expect just >>> "subobject 'foo'", but that's just a suggestion and I'll wait for a native >>> spearker to chime in on this. >> >> My expert brain likes `subobject of type 'T'`, but it's very wordy, and >> potentially not useful additional info. I'm partial to `subobject 'T'` due >> to it being the thing we're more likely to say in conversation (e.g. "that >> `int` isn't initialised"). I've also put out a mini-survey on the #include >> <C++> Discord server, and will update in a few hours. > > Hi, @cjdb thanks for your feedback and the mini-survey. > The objective of this patch is to print the subobject's name instead of its > type when it is not initialized in constexpr variable initializations. Thus, > I think it would be appropriate to add some more options to the survey like > "subobject named 'foo' is not initialized" and "subobject 'foo' is not > initialized" when the code looks like the following: > > template <typename T> > struct F { > T foo; > constexpr F(){} > }; > constexpr F <int>f; Ah, in that case, `subobject 'foo'` is better than `subobject named 'foo'` to me. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D146358/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D146358 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
